(Is equal marriage really about equality?)
In the eyes and minds of many Australians, the 7th of December 2017 should be known as the day Australia witnessed the official denial of a unique part of its character and perspective on life – its fair go, egalitarian attitude towards all. Hopefully, it will also mark the day that Australians began to fully acknowledge that politicians have no regard for the majority of hard working people living and paying taxes in this country. Many Australians watched with dismay and bemusement as live video of unrestrained arrogance and insensitive exuberance was streamed out to the entire world from the hallowed halls of their parliament house. Only the misguided YES supporters applauded this distasteful spectacle knowing that 4 out of 150 politicians (2.6%) had the courage and the deference to support the 40% of voters who voted NO.
Thought: With so many local councils wanting to remove Australia day from the 26th of January, it might be appropriate to start referring to the 7th of December as unAustralia day?
Once the so-called debate on SSM / equality was over and Australia’s charlatan politicians jubilantly amended the marriage laws, many YES devotees celebrated their ‘win’ in the belief that waves of euphoric love would spread across the country transforming it into a paradise kingdom of joy and harmony and unbridled enlightenment.
Unfortunately and sadly, there were YES supporters who secretly preferred to be NO supporters and either assumed the outcome would be an inevitable YES or did not want to face the pressures of the political correction brigade. Either way, they voted YES so they could be seen to support the ideals of equal rights and quickly return to their lives without further unwanted interruption.
The remaining YES supporters believed they were endorsing the progressive ideal of establishing the same rights for all Australians. Mantras of equality for all; equal marriage; same sex marriage were mindlessly repeated in blissful ignorance of being used as pawns in a classic Machiavellian move. Such high ideals appealed to many voters and were so effective in their influence that the outcome of the postal survey was decided in the first week, well before the debate commenced. At the very least, the majority of the 60% who selected YES naively believed that equity and fairness were the prime motivations for giving their support.
Regardless of the reasons 60% chose YES, their wishful thinking will not last long as more and more Australians realise that the opposite is not only to be the new reality, but the reality that was intended all along. In place of a kingdom of glorious love and equality for all, the citizens of Australia will gradually recognise the need to defend themselves against a deluge of coercive moves and underhanded tactics driven by a single goal – to impose submission to the eventual collapse of western culture as we have known it. The mantras were simply a euphoric distraction and will soon be replaced by “now is the time to punish the regressive 40%”.
Yes voters celebrating the SSM win
Behind the scenes sat a circle of likeminded groups and individuals that avoided exposure during the survey and silently allowed the popular notion of ‘equality for all’ to spearhead the preordained result. All the while, they harboured another, far more malicious, destructive, and longstanding agenda in readiness for an expected clear-cut YES result.
There are many labels and actions that are applied to such groups and individuals. Some include: leftists, socialists, marxists, communists, Labor, Greens, Fabians, liberalists, anti-fascists / anti-racists / anti-bullys, safe schools, feminists, and political correction / thought police. The list goes on. Together they represent a broad network known as the Left Unity. Individually and collectively, they actively promote the acceptance of socialism in Australia.
Members of the Left Unity include: Australian Greens; Australian Labor Party; Communist Party of Australia (Marxist–Leninist – also established and financed the Search Foundation); Getup (supports and promotes Labor and Greens’ agendas); Socialist Alliance (the university student network); Socialist Alternative; Socialist Equality Party; Socialist Party; Solidarity; and Workers’ Liberty Australia. Again the list goes on. The Communist Party maintains a “Roadmap to the Left” that lists political parties, organisations, and media outlets committed to developing a “comprehensive alternative to neo-liberal capitalism”. Regardless of their labels, or who the individuals are, or the groups they are affiliated with, all share a common mindset: a neo-Marxist / cultural Marxist doctrine. However, not all participants in these groups are fully aware of the roots of the doctrines they espouse or the agendas they unwittingly promote.
Tracing back through the history of leftist thinking to determine the roots of cultural Marxism is not a simple task. Even published experts do not agree on what gave rise to the ideals and agendas of the current doctrine. In reading through the mountain of articles available online, the only consistent pattern that emerges is the backgrounds and biases of the authors. That is, their position on the political spectrum determines whether cultural Marxism is accepted as valid (a right wing claim) or a fabrication / right wing conspiracy (a left wing claim). The left denies the existence of cultural Marxism; the right see it as the root of all evils in the Western world.
Several names and organisations stand out over the course of the decades since the Communist Revolution of 1917: Marx of course, Antonio Gramsci (Italian Marxist – The Prison Notebooks and Cultural hegemony), Georg Lukács (cultural terrorism), Felix Weil (funded a new Marxist Institute for Social Research, which later became the Frankfurt School), Columbia University (published works on Critical Theory), Theodor Adorno (Frankfurt School – redefined views on gender roles and sexual mores as prejudice), Max Horkheimer (Frankfurt School – essay titled Traditional and Critical Theory: Critical Theory), Herbert Marcuse (Frankfurt School – Eros and Civilization), and Rudi Dutschke (the long march through the institutions).
The above names and their key works are briefly listed in case anyone wants to look into each in more detail. The full list is far longer. The point made here is that a long line of Marxist related thinking preceded the 1960’s and continues to influence our lives and events to this day.
The social / cultural revolution of the 1960s rapidly opened the door to a range of liberations: free speech, civil rights, black power, feminism, gay rights, sexual freedom, and the anti-establishment movement. The 60’s counterculture movement gave rise to unbridled freedoms of actions and expression that were consistent with the principles and ideals articulated by earlier Marxist proponents. Since the 60s, we have witnessed the disturbing effects of multiculturalism, the family court, racial tensions, anti-discrimination laws, political correctness, an inconsistent legal system, media bias, information control, unashamed government propaganda and lies, the rewriting of history, the distortion of word meanings, the erosion of basic rights and free speech, gender dysphoria and fluidity, and the effects of postmodernism (relativistic thinking) and its offshoots, Critical Theory, Cultural Studies, Feminist Theory, and Gender Studies.
In all likelihood, none of the Left Unity groups will agree or admit to the existence of cultural Marxism, or the Frankfurt School, or for some, even the broader Marxist influences that have emerged over the past 100 years. Clearly the influences evolved over a long period of time and as yet have not been widely accepted as an agreed central doctrine. Perhaps the term ‘cultural Marxism’ is too politically charged to permit formal recognition. Thus, in the absence of an outright acknowledgement, it is difficult to establish the exact nature of the Left Unity’s common roots. However, with or without formal acknowledgement, what is obvious is that all share the ideals of cultural Marxist thinkers.
Although many writers claim the Frankfurt School produced a list of 11 recommendations (an 11 step plan) for the systematic subversion of western culture, it simply is not possible to directly attribute the list to the school or any of its members. A more plausible explanation is that the list could have been compiled from previous Marxist works.
Rather than get caught up in proving that the Frankfurt school produced the 11 step plan, it is more productive to read though the recommendations and ask whether each can be confirmed through examples. Then, ask why such a list exists at all – where could it have come from given that many examples can be found for each and every recommendation. Finally, ask if such confirmations are simply coincidence or contrived. On completing this exercise, it will be difficult to deny the conclusion that the 11 recommendations neatly summarise how to undermine the foundations of our society and bring about the type of dystopia we now see throughout Australia (and the world) every day:
- Establish wide ranging racism offences and hate speech laws.
- Generate continual change to cause confusion.
- Introduce sexual propaganda in schools and expose children to pornography to encourage acceptance and desire for homosexualisation.
- Undermine and remove parental and teachers’ authority.
- Use immigration to destroy national identity and provoke racial tension.
- Enable excessive use of alcoholic drink and recreational drugs.
- Establish sexual deviance as a norm in society.
- Create an unreliable legal system with bias against the victims of crime (trauma through injustice).
- Induce dependency on state benefits.
- Control and dumb down all media.
- Breakdown the family unit.
What exactly are our politicians really celebrating?
As mentioned above, members of the Frankfurt School published works on Critical Theory. The basic principles have evolved into a field of study known by the same deceptively innocuous title. The aim is to instruct students on the destructive criticism of Western culture. Through a wide range of related courses, Australian universities have assumed the right to instil in students a mindset of continual criticism of all aspects of Western culture that includes Christian values and morality. Critical Theory is underscored by a deep seated belief in the pervasiveness of Western evils: racism, sexism, colonialism, nationalism, homophobia, fascism, xenophobia, imperialism, white supremacy, and religious bigotry (applied only to Christianity).
By critiquing all aspects, traditions, beliefs, values, and assumptions that underpin Western culture, students and graduates have learned over the past few decades to question, undermine, and support the eventual destruction of Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethno-centrism, and conservatism.
Add to all this the decades long presence of the Socialist Alliance network within Australian Universities, many, if not all universities, particularly the G8 group, cannot be viewed as anything other than leftist in their thinking. Much of the content, the nature of the subjects, their academics, and the students themselves observe a highly progressive left-wing bias. All teach subjects and courses that cover one or more of the critical theory related topics listed beforehand. This form of mind programming is made even more potent due to the overrepresentation of feminist zealots and feminist studies in universities.
Is anyone still wondering why 60% of voters supported the YES position and why the greater proportion of YES voters was aged less than 30 years? This article has only scratched the surface of how far leftist ideology has taken root within Australia. In light of the outcome of the SSM survey and the obvious unpreparedness of conservatist opposition, it is also clear that their influence has spread far wider and deeper than most have imagined. This leaves one more question to ponder. On the 7th of /December 2017, were the politicians celebrating a win for SSM or the triumph of ‘cultural Marxism’ in Australia?
Was the outcome planned all along?