From:
https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2019-10-30/self-styled-paedophile-hunters-vow-to-continue-after-being-cleared-over-citizen-s-arrests/
The group, called Predator Exposure, "overstepped the mark", according to prosecutors, when they confronted the men after they had taken part in online chats with group members posing as teenagers, Leeds Crown Court heard.
Six of the group went on trial accused of charges including false imprisonment and common assault.
After just over a day of deliberations, they were cleared of all charges following an eight-day trial.
Shouts of "Yes!" came from the public gallery where the defendants' friends and family were seated.
Outside on the court steps the defendants and supporters wiped away tears and exchanged hugs and high fives.
Philip Hoban, 43, who set up the group, lit a thick cigar to cheers from supporters, and said: "This is just the first start and we'll be back hunting, very soon. Tune in people."
The group said they would be releasing a full statement on their website later.
Earlier jurors heard that the members detained and verbally abused two men and used unnecessary force against one, who was allegedly put in a headlock and dragged out of a shop against his will.
The defendants denied all the charges against them, claiming they were making lawful citizen's arrests.
In August 2018, four of the defendants went to a home in Normanton, West Yorkshire, to confront a man who had talked online with a Predator Exposure member posing as a 14-year-old, the court heard.
The man, who had been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder as a child and is believed to be on the autistic spectrum, was prevented from leaving his back garden and going inside his home to get his medication, and was left "extremely scared and upset".
Another man was confronted by five of the defendants in the Chapel Allerton area of Leeds in January this year.
He was chased to a nearby shop, where some members of the group attempted to physically drag him outside to make a citizen's arrest, the jury heard.
Both of the men who were confronted were arrested on suspicion of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity but, while prosecutors accepted the conversations between the men and the decoys did amount to criminal offences, neither of the men was charged.
Hoban, from Beeston in Leeds, and his 19-year-old son Jordan McDonald, from the Farnley area of Leeds, were found not guilty of two counts of false imprisonment and one of common assault.
Jordan Plain, 26, from Leeds, and Dean Walls, 52, from Moortown, Leeds, were found not guilty of one count of false imprisonment and one of common assault.
Kelly Meadows, 40, from Leeds, was found not guilty of two counts of false imprisonment, and Christine James-Roberts, 60, from Headingley, Leeds, was found not guilty of one charge of false imprisonment
West Yorkshire Police of course respects and accepts the view of the court. It was felt in the public interest to bring this matter to trial and for evidence to be tested by a jury.
We have repeatedly stated in recent years that protecting children from harm has been a top priority for West Yorkshire Police and that absolutely remains the case.
Officers always encourage members of the public to report any concerns about illegal internet activity of potential child abusers to us so that we can deal with it.
We are also concerned about the activities of online child abuse activist groups and their exposure activity in confronting persons they have identified.
We urge members of such 'exposure' groups not to carry out this activity and instead to report suspected offences in West Yorkshire to the force via 101 or the independent Crimestoppers charity on 0800 555 111.
– WEST YORKSHIRE POLICE STATEMENT
Last updated Wed 30 Oct 2019
view the rest of the comments →
Kahlypso79 ago
Yorkshire's Glorious Pedophile Past.
Huddersfield child sex inquiry: Thirty-one people charged
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-45193514
Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal
The fear of being seen as racist
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28967427
MolochHunter ago
hey nice to see you still lurkin around
that BBC 'fear of being racist'
what frustrates me about the handling is the failure to connect real-world dots and mechanics behind the fear
the BBC article talks about this fear of being seen as racist like its just some vague nebulous sentiment throughout the respective organisations
Lets look at the STRUCTURAL, INSTITUTIONAL source of that fear:
Fear of job loss is a very real concern. Human Resources Managers in every workplace will sack you in a heartbeat not just for actual racism but even for the SLIGHTEST APPEARANCE of Racism. Cops were in jeopardy of their jobs or career advancement. Social worker whistleblowers actually did lose their jobs
Human Resource Managments are compelled to impose this hair-trigger tyranny for Real World Concerns : their job is to Mitigate Risk -Legal Liabiliy and Reputational Loss that looms over every organisation from Discrimination Complaints in Courts and Human Rights Tribunals which can readily result in compensation payouts in tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds - plus legal fees
this fear of racism is Structurally Embedded and doesnt go away just by 'understanding the problem' - UK society needs to be restructured from Top Down to a) lessen the penalties for appearances of racism b) better distinguishing Actual Racism from appearances
Kahlypso79 ago
The Dialectic Process was created by Georg Hegel. The Dialectic Process was used as a process to describe change. Hegel, a social philosopher, used the Dialectic Process to describe how societies could come to a state of more rational, elevated thinking.
Karl Marx took Hegel’s idea of the Dialectic Process and changed it subtly. Marx used it as a process to describe social change. There are three key parts to the Dialectic Process:
The first is the Thesis – or Starting Point. A better term might be the Status Quo – where we are today.
Marx believed that in order for things to change there would have to be some form of opposition to the Status Quo. This opposition is the second part – the Antithesis – or the mechanism for change. It is the people and ideas that do not support the status quo – the opposing group.
When the Thesis and the Antithesis meet – or clash – you have the third component – Synthesis. Another word for Synthesis might be Revolution. Marx believed that Synthesis was Progress – a necessary confrontation that would allow for society to emerge as a better place for most people involved.
Marx believed the Dialectic Process to be a true process – an important distinction – as a true Process does not end – it is ongoing. In other words, once we reach Synthesis the process will start again. Synthesis will now become the Thesis – the Status Quo. And new Opposition will arise.
And that – in very simplistic terms – is how Marx perceived society progressing over time.
Marx also established the two basic divisions of a society – the “structure” or economic base that gives rise to the two classes – worker and capital owner; and the “superstructure” of institutions and beliefs that surrounds the economic base.
“Western civilization at the present day is passing through a crisis which is essentially different from anything that has been previously experienced. Other societies in the past have changed their social institutions or their religious beliefs under the influence of external forces or the slow development of internal growth. But none, like our own, has ever consciously faced the prospect of a fundamental alteration of the beliefs and institutions on which the whole fabric of social life rests … Civilization is being uprooted from its foundations in nature and tradition and is being reconstituted in a new organization which is as artificial and mechanical as a modern factory.”
~ Christopher Dawson, Enquiries into Religion and Culture, p. 259.
Social Engineering
Human Relations in Curriculum Change (ed. Kenneth D. Benne & Bozidar Muntyan, 1951) contains valuable information -- key to recognizing the social engineering group processes used for preparing populations to live in an elite-controlled collectivist society.
http://www.channelingreality.com/Niwa/Documents/Social_Engineering/1951_HRCC_Benne_122710.pdf
The transformational group processes found in Human Relations in Curriculum Change were used early on within the U.S. education system. They have since been applied to other sectors -- government, military, law enforcement, community development, churches, corporations, etc. -- and are being employed under the guise of leadership training, professional development, "problem solving," conflict resolution, (facilitated) consensus building, sensitivity training, Delphi, and many other labels. Through group activity, participants are processed for "group thinking" (a term used in Human Relations in Curriculum Change).
Excerpt from the book's preface that recognizes the role of the NEA: "Two recent lines of intellectual development with which one of the editors has had the good fortune to be closely associated have contributed fundamentally to this book. . . ." -- one of which includes:
Kurt Lewin is an important link between the National Training Labs (United States) and the Tavistock Institute (London).
Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) was a German-American psychologist, known as one of the modern pioneers of social, organizational, and applied psychology in the United States.
Lewin made a new life for himself, in which he defined himself and his contributions within three lenses of analysis: applied research, action research, and group communication.
Lewin often associated with the early Frankfurt School, originated by an influential group of largely Jewish Marxists at the Institute for Social Research in Germany. But when Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933 the Institute members had to disband, moving to England and then to America. In that year, he met with Eric Trist, of the London Tavistock Clinic. Trist was impressed with his theories and went on to use them in his studies on soldiers during the Second World War.
Kurt Lewin had moved from studying behaviour to engineering its change, particularly in relation to racial and religious conflicts, inventing sensitivity training, a technique for making people more aware of the effect they have on others, which some claim as the beginning of political correctness.
This would later influence the direction of much of work at the Tavistock Institute, in the direction of management and, some would say, manipulation, rather than fundamental research into human behaviour and the psyche. It was a partnership between Trist's group at the Tavistock, and Lewin's at MIT that launched the Journal 'Human Relations' just before Lewin's death in 1947.
Kahlypso79 ago
Tavistock Institute
Formed at Oxford University, London, in 1920 by the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA), a sister organization to the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) created by the Round Table, the Tavistock Clinic became the Psychiatric Division of the British Army during World War II
The clinic took its name from its benefactor Herbrand Russell, Marquees of Tavistock, 11th Duke of Bedford. The Dukes of Bedford was the title inherited by the influential Russell family, one of the most prominent aristocratic families in Britain who came to power and the peerage with the rise of the Tudor dynasty. Herbrand Russell and arch-conspirator Bertrand Russell shared the same great grandfather, John Russell, 6th Duke of Bedford. Bertrand Russell was descended from John Russell’s third son, Bertrand’s grandfather, John Russell, 1st Earl Russell, who served twice as Prime Minister of the England in the 1840s and 1860s. Herbrand Russell’s son, Hastings Russell, Lord Tavistock, the 12th Duke of Bedford, went on to become patron of the British Peoples Party, a far-right political party founded in 1939 and led by ex-members of Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists. It was he whom Rudolf Hess flew to England to contact about ending World War II.
A successor organization, the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, was then founded in 1946 under a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation when it separated from the Tavistock Clinic. According to John Coleman, a former British Intelligence agent, it was Tavistock-designed methods that got the US into World War II and which, under the guidance of Dr. Kurt Lewin, established the OSS. Tavistock became known as the focal point in Britain for psychoanalysis and the psychodynamic theories of Sigmund Freud and his followers. Tavistock is ostensibly a British charity concerned with group behavior and organizational behavior. Tavistock engages in educational, research and consultancy work in the social sciences and applied psychology. Its clients are chiefly public sector organizations, including the European Union, several British government departments, and some private clients. Its network now extends from the University of Sussex to the US through the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), Esalen Institute, MIT, Hudson Institute, Brookings Institution, Aspen Institute, Heritage Foundation, the Center of Strategic and International Studies at Georgetown, US Air Force Intelligence, and the RAND Corporation.
Sigmund Freud
David Bakan, in Sigmund Freud and The Jewish Mystical Tradition, has shown that Freud too was a “crypto-Sabbatean,” which would exlain his extensive interest in the occult and the Kabbalah. As shown in “The Consolation of Theosophy II,” an article by Frederick C. Crews for The New York Review of Books, several scholars have established that Freud was among the key figures who developed therapy through the retrieval of forgotten trauma, through a debt to Franz Anton Mesmer
Adam Crabtree’s From Mesmer to Freud: Magnetic Sleep and the Roots of Psychological Healing traces Mesmer’s use of artificially induced trance-states to uncover the influence of unconscious mental activity as the source of unaccountable thoughts or impulses. Jonathan Miller traced the steps by which psychologists gradually stripped Mesmerism of its occult associations, reducing it to mere hypnosis and thus paving the way for recognition of nonconscious mental functioning.
Hypnotism is nothing new. It is merely what had been known as putting someone under a spell, and practiced for thousands of years by witchdoctors, spirit mediums, shamans, Buddhists, and yogis. Freud himself was renowned in Vienna as a suggestive healer, his practice relying heavily on the use of hypnosis, a method he characterized as essentially "mystical." Freud engaged in magical propitiatory acts and tested the power of soothsayers. He confided to his biographer Ernest Jones his belief in "clairvoyant visions of episodes at a distance" and "visitations from departed spirits."
He even arranged a séance with his family members and three other analysts. He also practiced numerology and believed in telepathy. In Dreams and Occultism, he declared, "It would seem to me that psycho-analysis, by inserting the unconscious between what is physical and what was previously called 'psychical,' has paved the way for the assumption of such processes as telepathy."
Freud, when he was made aware of the Lurianic Kabbalah apparently exclaimed, “This is gold!” and asked why these ideas had never previously been brought to his attention. Carl Jung, who had worked with Freud, commented approvingly on the Jewish mystical origins of Freudian psychoanalysis, stating that in order to comprehend the origin of Freud’s theories:
Freud’s theories were excessively concerned with sex and even incest, which is reflected in Sabbatean antinomianism. As Gershom Scholem noted, the Sabbateans were particularly obsessed with upturning prohibitions against sexuality, particularly those against incest, as the Torah lists thirty-six prohibitions that are punishable by "extirpation of the soul,” half of them against incest. Baruchiah Russo (Osman Baba), who in about the year 1700 was the leader of the most radical wing of the Sabbateans in Salonika and who directly influenced Jacob Frank, not only declared these prohibitions abrogated but went so far as to transform their contents into commandments of the new “Messianic Torah.” Orgiastic rituals were preserved for a long time among Sabbatean groups and among the Dönmeh until about 1900. As late as the seventeenth century a festival was introduced called Purim, celebrated at the beginning of spring, which reached its climax in the "extinguishing of the lights" and in an orgiastic exchange of wives.
As Bakan indicated, in his book Moses and Monotheism, Freud makes clear that, as in the case of the Pharaohs of Egypt, incest confers god-like status on its perpetrators. In the same book, Freud argued that Moses had been a priest of Aten instituted by Akhenaten, the Pharaoh revered by Rosicrucian tradition, after whose death Moses was forced to leave Egypt with his followers. Freud also claims that Moses was an Egyptian, in an attempt to discredit the origin of the Law conferred by him. Commenting on these passages, Bakan claims that his attack on Moses was an attempt to abolish the law in the same way that Sabbatai Zevi did.
Thus, Freud disguised a Frankist creed with psychological jargon, proposing that conventional morality is an unnatural repression of the sexual urges imposed during childhood. Freud instead posited that we are driven by subconscious impulses, primarily the sex drive. In Totem and Taboo, published in 1913, which caused quite a scandal. Freud theorized about incest through the Greek myth of Oedipus, in which Oedipus unknowingly killed his father and married his mother, and incest and reincarnation rituals practiced in ancient Egypt. He used the Oedipus conflict to point out how much he believed that people desire incest and must repress that desire.
Through Freud’s influence, the “incest taboo” would become an issue of fundamental concern to the Frankfurt School. For example, Claude Levi-Strauss (1908 – 2009), a French anthropologist and one of the central figures in the structuralist school of thought, considered the universal taboo against incest as the cornerstone of human society. Incest, he believed, was not naturally repugnant, but became prohibited through culture. Lévi-Strauss’ theory was based on an analysis of the work of Marcel Mauss who believed that the basis of society is the need for the exchange of gifts. Because fathers and brothers would be unwilling to share their wives and daughters, a shortage of women would arise that would threaten the proliferation of a society. Thus was developed the “Alliance theory,” creating the universal prohibition of incest to enforce exogamy. The alliance theory, in which one’s daughter or sister is offered to someone outside a family circle starts a circle of exchange of women: in return, the giver is entitled to a woman from the other’s intimate kinship group. This supposedly global phenomenon takes the form of a “circulation of women” which links together the various social groups in single whole to form society.
Kahlypso79 ago
Frankfort School
In the days following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, it was believed that workers’ revolution would sweep into Europe and, eventually, into the United States. But it did not do so. Towards the end of 1922 the Communist International (Comintern) began to consider what were the reasons. On Lenin’s initiative a meeting was organized at the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow. Amongst those present were Georg Lukacs (a Hungarian aristocrat, son of a banker, who had become a Communist during World War I ; a good Marxist theoretician, he developed the idea of “Revolution and Eros” — sexual instinct used as an instrument of destruction); and Willi Münzenberg (whose proposed solution was to “organize the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilization stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat”). “It was,”said Ralph de Toledano (1916-2007), the conservative author and co-founder of the National Review, a meeting “perh "perhaps more harmful to Western civilization than the Bolshevik Revolution itself.”
Lenin died in 1924. By this time, however, Stalin was beginning to look on Münzenberg, Lukacs and like-thinkers as “revisionists.” In June 1940, Münzenberg fled to the south of France where, on Stalin’s orders, a NKVD assassination squad caught up with him and hanged him from a tree.
In the summer of 1924, after being attacked for his writings by the 5th Comintern Congress, Lukacs moved to Germany, where he chaired the first meeting of a group of Communist-oriented sociologists, a gathering that was to lead to the foundation of the Frankfurt School.
This “School” (designed to put flesh on their revolutionary program) was started at the University of Frankfurt in the Institut für Sozialforschung [Institute for Social Research]. To begin with, school and institute were indistinguishable. In 1923 Weil was born in Argentina and at the age of nine was sent to attend school in Germany. He attended the universities in Tübingen and Frankfurt, where he graduated with a doctoral degree in political science. While at these universities he became increasingly interested in socialism and Marxism.
The aim of the meeting was to clarify the concept of, and give concrete effect to, a Marxist cultural revolution.
'Cultural Marxism' and ((('critical theory'))) are concepts developed by a group of German intellectuals, who, in 1923 in Germany, founded the Institute of Social Research at Frankfurt University. The Institute, modeled after the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow, became known as the Frankfurt Schoo
In 1933, when the Nazis came to power in Germany, the members of the Frankfurt School fled to the United States. While here, they migrated to major U.S. universities (Columbia, Princeton, Brandeis, and California at Berkeley). These intellectual Marxists included Herbert Marcuse, who coined the phrase, 'make love, not war,' during the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations.
William S. Lind relates that 'cultural Marxism' is an ideology with deep roots. It did not begin with the counter-culture revolution in the mid-1960s. Its roots go back at least to the 1920s and the writings of the Italian Communist Antonio Gramsci. These roots, over time, spread to the writings of Herbert Marcuse.
Herbert Marcuse was one of the most prominent Frankfurt School promoters of Critical Theory's social revolution among college and university students in the 1960s. It is instructive to review what he has written on the subject:
"One can rightfully speak of a cultural revolution, since the protest is directed toward the
whole cultural establishment, including the morality of existing society ...
there is one thing we can say with complete assurance. The traditional idea of revolution
and the traditional strategy of revolution have ended. These ideas are old-fashioned ...
what we must undertake is a type of diffuse and dispersed disintegration of the system."
Kahlypso79 ago
This sentiment was first expressed by the early 20th century Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci.
Antonio Gramsci, a Marxist theorist and a founding member of the Communist Party of Italy, took this societal division a step further when he broke the “superstructure” into coercive (governmental, legal) and non-coercive (church, school, political party) elements. Gramsci defined the non-coercive elements as “civil society”. So Gramsci saw society as being comprised of three elements: the economic base, the coercive element and the non-coercive element.
Gramsci then created the Theory of Cultural Hegemony – the way in which nations use cultural institutions to maintain power in capitalist societies. In Gramsci’s view, the governing class – in order to succeed, maintain power and the status quo – must persuade those being governed to accept and even embrace the social, moral and political values held by the governing class. This is a subtle but crucial distinction. Gramsci felt that the ruling class’ primary method of control came from the non-coercive element. The coercive element was only used as a last resort.
Hegemony, Gramsci believed, was created through society’s institutions – the family, church, schools, economy, universities and government. These institutions were the bonds that cemented the ruled to the rulers.
His answer – his response – to Cultural Hegemony was exceedingly simple. Turn the process back on the governing hierarchy. Change the way institutions work – change the family, church, school – change social norms and beliefs. This would require the introduction of an entirely new set of values and beliefs – a new morality. It would also be slow.
Gramsci embraced gradualism – a policy of gradual reform as a means to his end. He recognized that his process must be lengthy, methodical and persistent. He advocated evolution over revolution – or as he put it “a long march through the institutions”. A slow transformation from within.
Gramsci insisted that alliances with non-Communist leftist groups would be essential to Communist victory. In our time, these would include radical feminist groups, extremist environmental organizations, so-called civil rights movements, anti-police associations, internationalist-minded groups, liberal church denominations, and others.
By winning 'cultural hegemony,' Gramsci pointed out that they could control the deepest wellsprings of human thought -- through the medium of mass psychology. Indeed, men could be made to 'love their servitude.' In terms of the gospel of the Frankfurt School, resistance to 'cultural Marxism' could be completely negated by placing the resister in a psychic 'iron cage.' The tools of mass psychology could be applied to produce this result.
(relate back to Mindwashing)
Kahlypso79 ago
By promoting the dialectic of 'negative' criticism, that is, pointing out the rational contradictions in a society's belief system, the Frankfurt School 'revolutionaries' dreamed of a utopia where their rules governed. "Their Critical Theory had to contain a strongly imaginative, even utopian strain, which transcends the limits of reality." Its tenets would never be subject to experimental evidence. The pure logic of their thoughts would be incontrovertible. As a precursor to today's 'postmodernism' in the intellectual academic community, "...it recognized that disinterested scientific research was impossible in a society in which men were themselves not yet autonomous...the researcher was always part of the social object he was attempting to study." This, of course, is the concept which led to the current fetish for the rewriting of history, and the vogue for our universities' law, English literature, and humanities disciplines -- deconstruction.
The Frankfurt school studied the 'authoritarian personality' which became synonymous with the male, the patriarchal head of the American family.
'The Authoritarian personality,' studied by the Frankfurt School in the 1940s and 1950s in America, prepared the way for the subsequent warfare against the masculine gender promoted by Herbert Marcuse and his band of social revolutionaries under the guise of 'women's liberation' and the New Left movement in the 1960s. The evidence that psychological techniques for changing personality is intended to mean emasculation of the American male is provided by Abraham Maslow, founder of Third Force Humanist Psychology and a promoter of the psychotherapeutic classroom, who wrote that, '...the next step in personal evolution is a transcendence of both masculinity and femininity to general humanness.
A modern utopia would be constructed by these idealistic intellectuals by 'turning Western civilization' upside down. This utopia would be a product of their imagination, a product not susceptible to criticism on the basis of the examination of evidence. This 'revolution' would be accomplished by fomenting a very quiet, subtle and slowly spreading 'cultural Marxism' which would apply to culture the principles of Karl Marx bolstered by the modern psychological tools of Sigmund Freud. Thus, 'cultural Marxism' became a marriage of Marx and Freud aimed at producing a 'quiet' revolution in the United States of America.
It is of interest to note that the 'sensitivity training' techniques used in our public schools over the past 30 years and which are now employed by the U.S. military to educate the troops about 'sexual harassment' were developed during World War II and thereafter by Kurt Lewin and his proteges. One of them, Abraham Maslow, was a member of the Frankfurt school and the author [18] of 'The Art of Facilitation' which is a manual used during such 'sensitivity' training. Thereby teachers were indoctrinated not to teach but to 'facilitate.' This manual describes the techniques developed by Kurt Lewin and others to change a person's world view via participation in small-group encounter sessions. Teachers were to become amateur group therapists. The classroom became the center of self-examination, therapeutic circles where children (and later on, military [19] personnel) talked about their own subjective feelings. This technique was designed to convince children they were the sole authority in their own lives.
Since the 1940s, subtle changes appeared in the Frankfurt School's descriptions of their work. For example, the opposite of the 'authoritarian personality' was no longer the 'revolutionary,' as it had been in previous studies aimed at Europeans. In America, it was now the 'democratic' who opposed the 'authoritarian personality.' Thus, their language matched more closely the liberal "...New Deal rather than Marxist or radical.." language. Education for tolerance, rather than praxis for revolutionary change, was the ostensible goal of their research. They were cleverly merging their language with the mainstream of liberal left thought in America while maintaining their 'cultural Marxist' objectives.
To further the advance of their cultural revolution the School recommended (among other things):
One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud’s idea of “pansexualism”– the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:
• attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children.
• abolish differences in the education of boys and girls.
• abolish all forms of male dominance – hence the presence of women in the armed forces.
• declare women to be an “oppressed class” and men as “oppressors.”
Münzenberg summed up the Frankfurt School’s long-term operation thus: “We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.”
Kahlypso79 ago
Critical Theory
Critical theory rejected the ideal of Western Civilization in the age of modern science, that is, the verification or falsifying of theory by experimental evidence. Only the superior mind was able to fashion the 'truths' from observation of the evidence. There would be no need to test these hypotheses against everyday experience.
One of the basic tenets of Critical Theory was the necessity to break down the contemporary family. The Institute scholars preached that "...Even a partial breakdown of parental authority in the family might tend to increase the readiness of a coming generation to accept social change." The 'generation gap' of the 1960s and the 'gender gap' of the 1990s are two aspects of the attempt by the elite Boomers (taking a page out of 'cultural Marxism') to transform American culture into their 'Marxist' utopia.
The transformation of American culture envisioned by the 'cultural Marxists' is based on matriarchal theory. That is, they propose transforming American culture into a female-dominated one. This is a direct throwback to Wilhelm Reich, a Frankfurt School member who considered matriarchal theory in psychoanalytic terms. In 1933, he wrote in The Mass Psychology of Fascism that matriarchy was the only genuine family type of 'natural society.'
Matriarchal Theory
Eric Fromm, another charter member of the Institute, was also one of the most active advocates of matriarchal theory. Fromm was especially taken with the idea that all love and altruistic feelings were ultimately derived from the maternal love necessitated by the extended period of human pregnancy and postnatal care. "Love was thus not dependent on sexuality, as Freud had supposed. In fact, sex was more often tied to hatred and destruction. Masculinity and femininity were not reflections of 'essential' sexual differences, as the romantics had thought. They were derived instead from differences in life functions, which were in part socially determined." This dogma was the precedent for today's radical feminist pronouncements appearing in nearly every major newspaper and TV program, including the television newscasts. For these current day radicals, male and female roles result from cultural indoctrination in America -- an indoctrination carried out by the male patriarchy to the detriment of women. Nature plays no role in this matter.
They proposed transforming our culture into a female-dominated one. In 1933, Wilhelm Reich, one of their members, wrote in The Mass Psychology of Fascism that matriarchy was the only genuine family type of “natural society.”
Education
Lord Bertrand Russell joined with the Frankfurt School in their effort at mass social engineering and spilled the beans in his 1951 book, The Impact of Science on Society. He wrote: “Physiology and psychology afford fields for scientific technique which still await development.” The importance of mass psychology “has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called education. The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate. It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray . When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.”
Writing in 1992 in Fidelio Magazine, (“The Frankfurt School and Political Correctness”), Michael Minnicino observed how the heirs of Marcuse and Adorno now completely dominate the universities, “teaching their own students to replace reason with ‘Politically Correct’ ritual exercises. There are very few theoretical books on arts, letters, or language published today in the United States or Europe which do not openly acknowledge their debt to the Frankfurt School. The witchhunt on today’s campuses is merely the implementation of Marcuse’s concept of ‘repressive toleration’ — tolerance for movements from the left, but intolerance for movements from the right — enforced by the students of the Frankfurt School.”
“Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture via infiltration of schools, universities, churches and the media by transforming the consciousness of society” – Antonio Gramsci
Kahlypso79 ago
Saul Alinsky (1909-1972) was a radical Chicago activist–idolized by Barack Obama–who had made a study of Antonio Gramsci’s blueprint for social transformation and avidly promoted the Frankfurt School’s strategy of the “long march through the institutions.”
Alinsky was convinced that the overthrow of western society should be carried out, not noisily, but with stealth and deception. It was necessary, he believed, to cultivate a down-to-earth image of pragmatism and centrism; he cultivated the rich and influential; politicians fell under his spell. He won the hearts of globalist-leaders around the world. “True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism,” Alinsky taught, “they cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within.” The trick, as he saw it, was to penetrate existing institutions: churches, unions, political parties. He even spent time in Milan with Cardinal Montini (later Pope Paul VI) at the instigation of Jacques Maritain
In the opening paragraph of his book Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals (published a year before his death and dedicated to Lucifer, “the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom”), he wrote, “What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.”
“Change” meant turning society inside out, and this would be accomplished by duping the idealistic middle classes, by winning their trust with fine-sounding phrases about morality. And all this, he declared, would come about through the work of “People’s Organizations.”
“These People’s Organizations,” wrote John Perazzo in FrontPageMagazine.com, “were to be composed largely of discontented individuals who believed that society was replete with injustices that prevented them from being able to live satisfying lives. Such organizations, Alinsky advised, should not be imported from the outside into a community, but rather should be staffed by locals who, with some guidance from trained radical organisers, could set their own agendas.”
And so it was that in the U.K. in 2009, David Cameron, apparently mesmerized by his friend Barack Obama, announced that he would help push forward the decades-long march by endorsing the Alinsky program by creating a “neighborhood army” of 5,000 full-time professional “community organizers.” Could he possibly have realized what he was doing?
In a February 2009 Investors Business Daily article entitled “Alinsky’s Rules: Must Reading In Obama Era,” Phyllis Schlafly wrote that Alinsky’s “tenth rule of the ethics of means and ends” is: “you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral arguments.” He doesn’t ignore traditional moral standards or dismiss them as unnecessary. He is much more devious; he teaches his followers that “Moral rationalization is indispensable at all times of action whether to justify the selection or the use of ends or means. . . .
“The organizer’s first job is to create the issues or problems,” and “organizations must be based on many issues.” The organizer “must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression. He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act. . . . An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.”
Critical Race Theory
Critical race theory refers to a broad social scientific approach to the study of race, racism, and society. Kimberlé Crenshaw and Derrick Bell popularised the notion of critical race theory within the subfield of critical legal studies in the 1980s. Both Crenshaw and Bell made reference to the fact that despite the civil rights legislation in the US, the social and economic conditions of African Americans had not improved. Through the concept of ‘interest convergence’, Bell even claimed that the reason why civil rights legislation passed in the first place was largely because it served the interests of America’s white elite.
In their seminal book, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, Delgado and Stefencic introduced critical race theory to the social sciences more broadly. Delgado and Stefencic claimed that critical race theory is based around the following premises:
More recently, Bonilla-Silva (2015: 74) has redeveloped the tenets of CRT to the following:
Kahlypso79 ago
The Network
In her booklet Sex & Social Engineering (Family Education Trust 1994) Valerie Riches observed how in the late 1960s and early 1970s, there were intensive parliamentary campaigns taking place emanating from a number of organisations in the field of birth control (i.e., contraception, abortion, sterilisation). ‘From an analysis of their annual reports, it became apparent that a comparatively small number of people were involved to a surprising degree in an array of pressure groups. This network was not only linked by personnel, but by funds, ideology and sometimes addresses: it was also backed by vested interests and supported by grants in some cases by government departments. At the heart of the network was the Family Planning Association (FPA) with its own collection of offshoots. What we unearthed was a power structure with enormous influence.
‘Deeper investigation revealed that the network, in fact extended further afield, into eugenics, population control, birth control, sexual and family law reforms, sex and health education. Its tentacles reached out to publishing houses, medical, educational and research establishments, women’s organisations and marriage guidance—anywhere where influence could be exerted. It appeared to have great influence over the media, and over permanent officials in relevant government departments, out of all proportion to the numbers involved.
‘During our investigations, a speaker at a Sex Education Symposium in Liverpool outlined tactics of sex education saying: ‘if we do not get into sex education, children will simply follow the mores of their parents’. The fact that sex education was to be the vehicle for peddlers of secular humanism soon became apparent.
‘However, at that time the power of the network and the full implications of its activities were not fully understood. It was thought that the situation was confined to Britain. The international implications had not been grasped.
‘Soon after, a little book was published with the intriguing title The Men Behind Hitler—A German Warning to the World. Its thesis was that the eugenics movement, which had gained popularity early in the twentieth century, had gone underground following the holocaust in Nazi Germany, but was still active and functioning through organizations promoting abortion, euthanasia, sterilization, mental health, etc. The author urged the reader to look at his home country and neighbouring countries, for he would surely find that members and committees of these organizations would cross-check to a remarkable extent.
‘Other books and papers from independent sources later confirmed this situation. . . . A remarkable book was also published in America which documented the activities of the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS). It was entitled The SIECUS Circle A Humanist Revolution. SIECUS was set up in 1964 and lost no time in engaging in a programme of social engineering by means of sex education in the schools. Its first executive director was Mary Calderone, who was also closely linked to Planned Parenthood, the American equivalent of the British FPA. According to The SIECUS Circle, Calderone supported sentiments and theories put forward by Rudolph Dreikus, a humanist, such as:
· merging or reversing the sexes or sex roles;
· liberating children from their families;
· abolishing the family as we know it’
In their book Mind Siege, (Thomas Nelson, 2000) Tim LaHaye and David A. Noebel confirmed Riches’s findings of an international network. ‘The leading authorities of Secular Humanism may be pictured as the starting lineup of a baseball team: pitching is John Dewey; catching is Isaac Asimov; first base is Paul Kurtz; second base is Corliss Lamont; third base is Bertrand Russell; shortstop is Julian Huxley; left fielder is Richard Dawkins; center fielder is Margaret Sanger; right fielder is Carl Rogers; manager is ‘Christianity is for losers’ Ted Turner; designated hitter is Mary Calderone; utility players include the hundreds listed in the back of Humanist Manifesto I and II, including Eugenia C. Scott, Alfred Kinsey, Abraham Maslow, Erich Fromm, Rollo May, and Betty Friedan.
‘In the grandstands sit the sponsoring or sustaining organizations, such as the . . . the Frankfurt School; the left wing of the Democratic Party; the Democratic Socialists of America; Harvard University; Yale University; University of Minnesota; University of California (Berkeley); and two thousand other colleges and universities.’
A practical example of how the tidal wave of Maslow-think is engulfing English schools was revealed in an article in the British Nat assoc. of Catholic Families’ (NACF) Catholic Family newspaper (August 2000), where James Caffrey warned about the Citizenship (PSHE) programme which was shortly to be drafted into the National Curriculum. ‘We need to look carefully at the vocabulary used in this new subject’, he wrote, ‘and, more importantly, discover the philosophical basis on which it is founded. The clues to this can be found in the word ‘choice’ which occurs frequently in the Citizenship documentation and the great emphasis placed on pupils’ discussing and ‘clarifying’ their own views, values and choices about any given issue. This is nothing other than the concept known as ‘Values Clarification’ - a concept anathema to Catholicism, or indeed, to Judaism and Islam.
‘This concept was pioneered in California in the 1960’s by psychologists William Coulson, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. It was based on ‘humanistic’ psychology, in which patients were regarded as the sole judge of their actions and moral behaviour. Having pioneered the technique of Values Clarification the psychologists introduced it into schools and other institutions such as convents and seminaries - with disastrous results. Convents emptied, religious lost their vocations and there was wholesale loss of belief in God. Why? Because Catholic institutions are founded on absolute beliefs in, for example, the Creed and the Ten Commandments. Values Clarification supposes a moral relativism in which there is no absolute right or wrong and no dependence on God.
‘This same system is to be introduced to the vulnerable minds of infants, juniors and adolescents in the years 2000+. The underlying philosophy of Values Clarification holds that for teachers to promote virtues such as honesty, justice or chastity constitutes indoctrination of children and ‘violates’ their moral freedom. It is urged that children should be free to choose their own values; the teacher must merely ‘facilitate’ and must avoid all moralising or criticising. As a barrister commented recently on worrying trends in Australian education, ‘The core theme of values clarification is that there are no right or wrong values. Values education does not seek to identify and transmit ‘right’ values, teaching of the Church, especially the papal encyclical Evangelium Vitae.
‘In the absence of clear moral guidance, children naturally make choices based on feelings. Powerful peer pressure, freed from the values which stem from a divine source, ensure that ‘shared values’ sink to the lowest common denominator. References to environmental sustainability lead to a mindset where anti-life arguments for population control are present ed as being both responsible and desirable. Similarly, ‘informed choices’ about health and lifestyles are euphemisms for attitudes antithetical to Christian views on motherhood, fatherhood, the sacrament of marriage and family life. Values Clarification is covert and dangerous. It underpins the entire rationale of Citizenship (PSHE) and is to be introduced by statute into the UK soon. It will give young people secular values and imbue them with the attitude that they alone hold ultimate authority and judgement about their lives. No Catholic school can include this new subject as formulated in the Curriculum 2000 document within its current curriculum provision. Dr. William Coulson recognised the psychological damage Rogers’ technique inflicted on youngsters and rejected it, devoting his life to exposing its dangers.
Kahlypso79 ago
The goal of the Frankfurt School was to move America gradually to the Left using the precepts of Gramsci’s Counter Hegemony and the practice of Critical Theory. Changing the Culture of America through Gramsci’s “long march through the institutions”.
In 1958, W. Cleon Skousen authored his famous book The Naked Communist. In it, Skousen listed what he perceived as the “Current Communist Goals”.