Heart, Mind and Soul Communism
Part 4 in a continuing series
by Dr. Fred Schwarz

      A short while ago I was in Edinburgh, Scotland, and I became involved in an argument with a group of Communists conducting a meeting in the main thoroughfare, Princes Street. In the midst of the argument one Communist asked me, “Well, what is freedom?” I replied, “You might define freedom as the right to live like an American, inhabit a comfortable and centrally heated home, drive your own automobile, own a refrigerator, a washing machine, a radio, a television set, eat all the food you desire, and have an argument like this without the police cutting your throat.” He replied, “If I was a policeman, I would cut your throat.” I said, “Do you really mean that?” He replied, “I certainly do.” I called to the surrounding crowd, “Listen to this; here is a good object lesson.” Another Communist intervened, “We’ve all got to die sometime. What does it matter if you die a little sooner instead of later?” They were not angry; they were not facetious; they were simply stating sound Communistic doctrine. Man is an animal. Individual life is insignificant. In the great and noble task of redeeming mankind, why worry over a few early deaths by the way?
      Thus we see the consistent logic of the Communists. Should you ask them, “You inhuman monsters; do you mean to say you would murder in cold blood millions of people?” they would unhesitatingly reply, “What do you mean by murder? That is a Bourgeois term. Nature has been killing people by countless millions for centuries, killing them by hunger, war, disease, and old age; killing them to no purpose. We have a purpose, and a noble one, and should we hesitate to take the necessary steps because they are unpleasant to our Bourgeois prejudices? How unworthy we would be of the task history has entrusted to us.” Cold, inexorable, scientific logic.
      Recently I conversed with two very well known men, each of whom had been a member of the American Communist Party for many years. Of both I asked the same question. “What are the plans of the American Communist Party with regard to liquidation in this country?” Both replied in this vein: I often heard it discussed in Party circles. The argument went like this:  This character disease is derived from the Capitalistic System. Capitalism in America is more developed than in any other country. Therefore its imprint in personality is deeper. The percentage to be liquidated here will be correspondingly higher. As a tentative figure shall we say about one-third of the American people will be marked for liquidation.
      From the two similar answers recounted in the preceding

paragraph, we learn that the Communists plan to put to death one third of the population. Who are these people to be? The prime factor to be considered is class of social origin. Mrs. Sikorsky gives an official list of classes designated in the rape of Lithuania and Poland in her book, The Dark Side of the Moon. Of special interest to church people is “Category 13,” which includes persons active in parishes, clergymen, secretaries, and active members of religious communities. In Lithuania the lists for liquidation and deportation included about 700,000 out of a total population of 3,000,000, slightly less than the one-third proposed for America. But Lithuania had not advanced so far in a Capitalistic sense as has America.
      Should the Communist menace conquer this country, it may comfort you to know that the hand that condemns you and your family to death is driven not by malicious vindictive hatred, but by scientific necessity.
LABOR CAMPS
      Not all those diseased are immediately liquidated by bullet or bayonet. Others go by the slower pathway of overwork and starvation. Let us return to our animal husbandry analogy. The herd has been transferred to the new environment of Socialism. In this environment, a great deal of work cries out to be done, and there is a totally inadequate supply of clean stock for the purpose. It is therefore reasonable to select diseased animals in whom the disease is not overwhelmingly contagious, segregate them, and put them to work until they die. They are not allowed to breed and thus contaminate the future race, but they can be useful in segregation. This is done under arduous conditions of climatic extremes, overcrowding, malnutrition and frequent death. Nevertheless, much work useful to Socialism is thus accomplished. Canals and railways are built; salt, coal, gold, and uranium are mined; lumber is felled for export, and cities are built in the frozen Arctic wastes. In these conditions of labor the average time to die takes approximately three years, and much work is accomplished in that time.
      This is what the labor camps are in practice, but in theory they are something quite different. They are “personality hospitals” in which the disease due to Capitalism can be cured. The cause of the disease is the false labor relations of the Capitalistic Society wherein labor is associated with profit and reward. The cure consists in being established in new labor relations where labor is its own reward. Where it is divorced from the degradation of gain. We term these “slave labor camps,” because in them people are forced to labor and receive nothing in return but the merest minimum of food to maintain existence. The Communists say our opinion is only a revelation of our Bourgeois ignorance. The Communists maintain that these slave labor camps are actually only ‘personality hospitals” wherein people can be re-educated, healed of their grievous Capitalistic disease and become fit members of the new Socialistic Society. Were you to say to a

Communist, “You beast! You mean you would send a twelve year old boy to serve ten years in a labor camp?” He would reply “If your son was sick would you send him to a hospital?” There is a consistency of logic and an ethical justification for every inhumanity and bestiality Communism commits. This insulates them from the appeals of reason decency and humanity. They even provide these “personality hospitals” free. What generous people they are ! As the reader retires tonight it would be a profitable theme of meditation to ponder which he would prefer—immediate liquidation, or re-education in a labor camp. The alternative may soon emerge from the realm of theory to intensely practical politics.
MASS RE-EDUCATION
      While the labor camps provide specialized hospitalization, the less fortunate sufferers are not being overlooked. Re-education is provided for them by a new attitude toward labor. Work is now taught to be the great creative force that built the universe and that it is its own reward. However, work nevertheless must bring with it remuneration appropriate to its measure. Every means of speed-up in industry is introduced; labor is exploited in every possible way. The slogan is: “From every man according to his ability; to every man according to his work.” The unions become instruments of the dictatorship for the speed up of work and a means of discipline over the workers. Strikes are forbidden and any incitement to strike is a capital offense. Every factory has its own jails, late arrival to work is sabotage and absenteeism is treason. Under these ideal working conditions a new attitude toward labor develops; a new character emerges; the new Socialist man is on the way.
THE EMERGENCE OF YOUNG UNMARRED BY CAPITALISM
      Along with this vast program of re-education, the much simpler program of the education of the new-born Socialist children comes into being. These have the inestimable benefits of birth into a clean environment. There is no vicious profit motive to despoil them, no patriotism to degrade, and no religion to debauch. All they need is scientific indoctrination and an appropriate conditioning to fulfill all the needs of the most exacting Socialist master. The sin of bygone days becomes an unpleasant memory. The task of the dictatorship is approaching conclusion.
EMERGENCE OF COMMUNISM
      As the program of science proceeds and the perfection of personality comes to pass, the rigid state of the dictatorship, with its restrictions on human freedom, becomes unnecessary, and the state begins to wither away. Gradually, by imperceptible degrees, the golden age of Communism comes to pass, in which everyone works for the sheer love of working, everyone gives because it is the glory of his heart 

so to do. The hand of no man is raised in anger against his brother; the wolf lies down with the lamb; the small child plays on the cockatrice’s den, the tuberculous organisms lose their virility; the cancer cells lose their malignity. Everyone takes from the common pool all they need, and men the whole world over are brothers. The slogan of this period is, “From every man according to his ability; to every man according to his need.”
      This is the dream, the vision that lures men to the Communist hook, the goal at the end of the rainbow. The Communists have achieved portions of it—the violent and destructive revolution, the mass extermination, and the vile labor camps. The rest remains in the realm of pure hypotheses where it is doomed to die with many past Marxian illusions. Every fact of Communist history contradicts the specious optimism that human nature will perfect itself under the dictatorship of the Proletariat. The evidence against this thesis provided by the Communists themselves is shattering. Take the deterioration that has taken place in the character of leading Communists under the Russian system. In 1917 the Central Committee consisted of 31 members and alternates. The leader, Lenin, attributed the entire success of the Revolution to the sterling characters, undying devotion and invincible selflessness of this group. Everyone of them had suffered much for the cause in prison and out of prison, in exile and out of exile. In torture and imminent danger of death they remained loyal, devoted, and invincible. It is noteworthy that these fine characters were formed under Capitalism. At long last the golden day of their dreams came to pass and Socialism covered one sixth of the surface of the earth. Freed from the vicious influence of the Capitalist System, what wonderful people they must have become! Let the Communists tell us what happened to them. Lenin and Sverdlov died before Stalin came to power. Alexandra Kollontai lived to die a natural death The remainder degenerated into such offal, such swine, such treacherous wild beasts, such hyenas using Communist terminology—that every one had to be put to death. When Lenin died in 1924 the Politbureau, the highest body of world Communism, had seven members—Zinoviev, Kamenev, Stalin, Bukharin, Trotsky, Rykov, and Tomsky. Stalin alone survived. All the others degenerated and had to be destroyed. The perfection of character is thus revealed as a delusion; the chain of events breaks down, the golden future fades and we are left with the intolerable nightmare of the dreadful present; the dictatorship, the extermination program, the labor camp, horror piled on horror, a veritable living hell. Farewell, perfection. The beast is here and here he remains.
      Truly the Bible says, “The fool has said in his heart there is no God. They have altogether become corrupt, they have done abominable works; there is none that doeth good.”

Watch for the last of this series by Dr. Schwarz next month.

continued from page 1

member of the last Communist cabinet before 1999. This election represents the Kronstadt of the Polish democratic forces.
      Last spring, another Communist, Josef Oleksy, became prime minister of Poland. In December 1995, a few days before the end of his presidency, Walesa presented the highest officials of the state with a series of documents that provided strong evidence that Oleksy has been a KGB agent since 1983.  Oleksy was forced to resign as prime minister, but within a week  of his resignation, he was chosen to head up the Social Democrats, the party of the “post-Communists” and Kwasniewski. The Social Democrats, in short, decided to rehabilitate Oleksy, even before the charges against him had been dealt with. A special committee of parliament, which has been controlled by the Communists and their stooges since September 1993, is investigating the allegations.
      The victory of the Communists in Poland has given extra encouragement to the resurgent Communists in Russia, who were victorious in the Dec. 17, 1995, parliamentary elections. Similar processes and results have taken place in other Eastern European states in the last 19 months.
      Cicero must have had the Communists in mind when he said in his Second Oration against Catiline:
      “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious, but it cannot survive treason from within.... For the traitor appears no traitor.... He works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city. He infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.”
Reasons for Communist Success in Eastern Europe
      There are several reasons for the Communists’ success in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. First, there was no cleansing or removal of Communists and the political police from positions of power. Furthermore, there was no accountability for the crimes which the Communists and the political police committed against their citizens during the 45 years of Communist rule. Only the politically naive could believe that communism would merely fade away.
      It is a pity that the lessons of de-Nazification and the cleansing of Japan were not applied in the Communists world after 1989. When the victorious Allies entered Germany in 1945, they made a concerted effort to arrest every SS and Gestapo man and the high-ranking officials of Hitler’s government.  As a young officer in the Polish Armored Division, which fought from Normandy through Belgium and Holland to Germany, I participated in the round-up of Nazis and Gestapo and SS men. The Nuremberg Trials punished those whose guilt was established. The Nazis were prevented from participating in any branch of the postwar German government, except in the Eastern zone, where a number of them became high officials in the Communist regime. In Japan, too, war criminals were arrested and punished, and

220,000 officialswere prevented from having any official role to play in the post-war era. In addition, both Germany and Japan were occupied for a number of years by the Allies. That is the reason democracy was able to take root in those countries.
      Nothing comparable took place in the East European countries or the Soviet Union after 1989, except in the Czech Republic and East Germany. In the case of the Czech Republic, the government recently extended its ban against Communists for another five years. In all the other countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, however, there was no retaliation.
      In Poland in 1989, the Communist minister of the Interior, Gen. Czeslaw Kiszczak, succeeded in arranging the Round Table Conference, which resulted in power sharing. This allowed the Communists to retain control over the intelligence services; the Ministry of the Interior, which is in charge of the police; the Ministry of Defense; and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The top echelons of the present military—the generals and admirals—were trained in Moscow and were members of the Communist Party.
      Until recently, the diplomatic and consular services included some people who were associated with Solidarity, but in the last two years they have been replaced by members of the old nomenclator or by individuals acceptable to the old nomenclator.
      For example, about two years ago, one of the shrewdest apparatchiks, Jerzy Kozrninski, was appointed ambassador to Washington. In a very short time, he succeeded in mesmerizing a number of high American officials.
      It is ironic that the Communist Kwasniewski still expresses interest in having Poland admitted to NATO. However, since the military intelligence in Poland and other East European countries is controlled by Primakov’s agents, i.e., by the Russian GRU (Chief Intelligence Directorate), admitting to NATO the East European countries that are led by Communists would be like opening the gates of Troy to the Trojan horse.
      In 1989, when the Communists stepped aside, Kwasniewski created a new party called The Left Democratic Alliance. At the time, he stated that it would take him 15 years to come to power. In fact, it has taken him only six years to reach his goal. His forces were disciplined,well organized and well financed by Moscow, while the democratic forces were in disarray and poorly financed.
‘Reform’ Communists Believe in Power
      A number of ritualistic liberals and journalists in Poland and abroad treat Kwasniewski as if he were a reformed Communist. There is, however, no indication whatsoever that he has rejected communism. The same is true of the top echelon of the Communists in Poland and other East European countries. No Communist today believes in the outdated concept of Marxist egalitarianism. The essence of 20th-Century communism is power and the art of acquiring it. The so-called reformed Communist may be willing to co­exist

with naive elements in other political parties for the time being, but the core of their belief is the retention and maximization of power.
      The most important reason the Communists were obliged to initiate a strategic retreat seven years ago was that the economy was about to collapse. To survive, they needed a resuscitation of the economy, which they are achieving with great help from the governments of Western Europe, Japan and the United States and from various banks and businesses, whose leaders are greedy and politically ignorant. The Communists’ political aims, however, have never changed.
      The true significance of Kwasniewski’s victory can be illustrated by the following example. Let us assume that no anti-Nazi rules were imposed by the Allies in post-war Germany. Let us further assume that the Nazis formed the Social Democrats, which became the core of a coalition called the Democratic Alliance and, five years after the end of the war, a top aide to Hitler got himself elected as chancellor or president of West Germany. How many people would have believed that such a figure had abandoned his Nazi convictions and become a Konrad Adenauer-type of democrat?
      It would also be utter folly to believe that the top echelon of Communists in Eastern Europe would suddenly and voluntarily get rid of them and that they have now become Jeffersonian democrats. Yet a number of policy maker in the Western world believe exactly that—that there are no more Communists, that the Communists have become post-Communist reformers who should be supported financially and otherwise.
      There was a similar phase in Russia when Lenin introduced the NEP (New Economic Policy) in 1921. Many influential individuals in the Westem world were convinced that the Soviets had abandoned communism and were replacing it with a market economy and political pluralism. Western businesses poured an enormous amount of money into the country in order to industrialize the Soviet Union. All of us know the consequences of that action when it was terminated by Stalin in 1928.
Use Democratic Process To Destroy Democracies
      What is happening in Eastern Europe and Russia today is a second, more gigantic NEP whereby vast amounts of money and technology are being invested by the West at the same time that the Communists are regrouping and regaining power, using democratic processes to destroy the fledgling democracies. The devastating consequences of Western gullibility in the 1920s and 1930s should teach us a lesson today.
      The centerpiece of American foreign policy in Europe is Germany and Russia. No effort is spared to cement American-Russian and American-German relations at the

expense of other European countries, especially the nations of Central and Eastern Europe. Last May, President Clinton flew to Moscow to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II. He conveniently ignored the fact that the 1939 treaty between Stalin and Hitler contributed greatly to that catastrophe. Vice President Al Gore traveled to Bera.  Neither of them cared to stop in Warsaw or to invite Lech Walesa, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, to the celebration of that anniversary in Berlin.
      That was a humiliation for President Walesa, the leader of Solidarity, which had gallantly fought the Communists 15 years before. For the majority of the Poles, it was offensive that they, who had stood up to Hitler in spite of the realization that Poland had no chance of defeating him, were left out of the celebration of Hitler’s defeat.
      The following day, Walesa delivered two speeches—one to Parliament and the other at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier—in which he expressed bitter resentment at the ignominy inflicted on Poland by Bill Clinton, John Major and Helmut Kohl.
      A visit to Warsaw by the American President a few months before the Polish presidential election would have boosted Walesa’s standing and perhaps prevented the election of a Communist president. There is little doubt, however, that this year during the American presidential campaign, Clinton or Gore will visit Poland in order to get the votes of the ten million Americans of Polish descent.
      Two days after the November 19th election, Clinton telephoned President-Elect Kwasniewski to congratulate him on his victory. Would Truman have telephoned Albert Speer, Hitler’s loyal defense minister, had the latter won an election in Germany as a reformed Nazi?
      Clinton expressed the hope that Poland and the United States will maintain a good and close relationship based on “their mutual dedication to democracy.” Zbigniew Sierniatkowski, spokesman for Kwasniewski, stated that the conversation, which was initiated by Clinton, lasted 10 minutes. Clinton also expressed the hope that it will not be long before he and Kwasniewski meet, and the two of them agreed to have frequent telephone conversations in the meantime. Since his election last November, Kwasniewski has made several efforts to meet with Pope John Paul II, but the Pope has refused to do so. On November 22, Kwasniewski appeared on Moscow television,where he was introduced as the president of Poland, although he was not inaugurated until December 20 and endorsed the Communist candidates for the Russian Duma, who won the election on December 17.
      That election, of course, greatly strengthened the Communists who want to recreate the Soviet Union. On March 15, 1996, the Communist-led Duma, in fact, decried the break-up of the Soviet Union and demanded its restoration. A resolution to reestablish the USSR not only received strong support from the Communists, but also from the nationalists as well, and passed by a vote of 250 to 98, with no

abstentions. By an even larger margin, the Duma passed a second resolution asserting that a March 1991 referendum supporting the continuation of the Soviet Union was legally binding. On several occasions, Gained Zyuganov, head of the Russian Communist Party and presently favored to beat President Boris Yeltsin in the June elections, has trumpeted the party’s determination to regain all the territories that were controlled by Tsar Alexander II, as well as reestablish the union.
Clinton Buys Friendship By Sacrificing Allies
      The democratic forces of Central and Eastern Europe have suffered a considerable blow from the Communists. The reaction of the Western world has been mostly rhetorical. The genuine democratic elements in these areas are becoming more aware that their fate is of little interest to the Western world— The existence of the East European countries acquires spasmodic significance only prior to American presidential elections. Many East European leaders are convinced that the Clinton Administration has embarked on a policy of buying the friendships of former enemies—the Germans and the Russians—by sacrificing the small countries of Eastern Europe, which have been traditional allies of the West.
      The Communists’ recent victory in Russia has shaken up Boris Yeltsin, who realizes that if he loses reelection in June, he may face the fate of South Korean Presidents Chun Doo Hwan and Roh Tae Woo, who are now on trail for using force against demonstrators. Yeltsin has, therefore, moved closer politically to the hard-liners. On January 9, he fired his pro-Western foreign minister, Andrei Kozyrev, and replaced him with KGB Gen. Yevgeny Primakov, who was in charge of the gigantic Russian network of spies abroad.  Then YeItsin fired his chief of staff, Sergei Filatov, and replaced him with the Stalinist Yegorov. Lastly he fired the First Deputy Prime Minister Anatoly Chubais—an able economist and dedicated reformer who stood for a market economy and financial stability—and replaced him with Vladimir Kadannikov, a hard-line bureaucrat who is opposed to free trade and a market economy.
      cShortly afterward, Yeltsin dispatched Prime Minister Vik-tor Chernomyrdin to Washington to allay the West’s fears resulting from these developments and to get a $10.2 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund. The Russian government promised to reduce inflation from its 1995 level of 135% to 25% in 1996, a promise which is inherently implausible. Clinton approved this request even before the American experts concluded negotiations with the Russian representatives. In an attempt to justify Clinton’s approval of this loan, Gore proclaimed, “We don’t judge them by what they say, but by what they do.” This is utter

nonsense. Gore disregarded the fact that Yeltsin fired all the reformers and replaced them with Stalinists. Those acts speak louder than any of Yeltsin’s preelection promises.
      There is very little doubt that several billion dollars of that loan will be spent on the reelection of Yeltsin, who promised to give back-pay to coal miners, veterans and civil servants to secure their votes. Very little of that loan will go toward reform. And Yeltsin’s chances of reelection are still in the single digits.
      Clinton’s recent visit to Moscow is unlikely to  do much for Yeltsin politically. Yeltsin’s decline is a Greek tragedy. The man whose splendid leadership saved Russian in 1991 and again in 1994 appears to have drowned his political future and the chances of Russia’s emerging as a democracy in a sea of vodka.
Russian Version of National Socialism?
      Communist Party leader Qcnnady Zyuganov,who has forged an unholy alliance with the nationalists and militarists, has been campaigning for the presidency by promising to re-create an expansionist Russian empire. His flirtation with the nationalists and the militarists may result in a Russian National Socialism. Gen. Aleksander Lebed, a man with charismatic qualities, is surging ahead with a promise similar to Zyuganov’s. There is a strong prospect that the Warsaw Pact will be reestablished soon afterward. The United States should be supporting reformers like Yavlinsky, Gaidar, Chubais, Adam Glapinksi, Klaus and Havel, not the Yeltsins and Kwisniewskis of Russia and Eastern Europe.
      The return of communism in Russia and Central Europe acquires even greater significance in the light of the emergence of Communist China and a superpower—with its 1.2 billion people and its persistent acquisition of high technology from Japan, Western Europe and the United States. This will have monumental implications for the Western world 10 or 15 years from now. The Chinese are bolstering their military and have demonstrated an aggressive posture toward various nations in the area, with their menacing military threats against Taiwan the most ominous of their actions.
      The prospect of newly victorious Communists in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union acting in concert with Communist China casts a deadly Red shadow over the democratic world.
      Neither Eastern Europe, Russia nor China operates in a vacuum. The success of the “post-Communist” regimes depends on how the United States reacts to resurgent communism. Ultimate Communist victory is far from inevitable. But the complacency and shortsightedness of the West make it possible.

This article was taken from Human Events.

q    “Did you know that truth does not exist and that all knowledge and values are artificial constructions to serve the interest of the powerful?  If you don’t know this, then you are obviously not the benficiary of a  recent American college education.
      “A wide variety of academic subjects have appropriated Karl Marx’s 19th-Century idea that ‘truth’ is never more nor less than propaganda that serves the material interest of the ruling class.  When the workers took over, as Marx thought they would, truth would be whatever served the interests of the working class.
      “In Marx’s day, the capitalists were the bad guys, and the workers were the good guys.  But today, all heterosexual guys are bad.  Feminist studies, queer studies, postmodernists and deconstructionists have assigned villainy to just about everyone.  The only sympathetic figure left is the black disabled lesbian, and it won’t be long before this icon is deconstructed also.
      “The various denunciatory doctrines that reign in college classrooms are a way of unmasking success, achievement, accomplishment and heroism by placing a qualifier before the subject under attack.  For example, ‘white’ success is foreordained because it is based on keeping down other races.  ‘Male’ success is based on ‘glass ceiling’ and ‘gender standards’ that winnow out women.
      “It is an easy game to play once you get the hang of it.  Everyone gets in on the act— historians, philosophers, English departments, law schools, even music critics.  The message is that every positive or affirmatory statement is puffery to serve some vested interest or the other.
      “Only denunciatory statements are considered honest, and denunciation is in full swing, exposing Western civilization as the biggest deceit of all—a massive social construct to ensure the hegemony of a tiny white minority over the darker-skinned peoples of the world.
      “The ‘isms’ and ‘ists’ of academic studies have only one purpose—to teach class, race, gender and other hatreds.  White heterosexual males bear the biggest brunt of the assault.  Everyone else is taught to hate them, but there is no one that it is permissible for white males to hate except themselves.
      “Minority males, if they are heterosexual, can be targets of ‘lesbian and gay’ studies.  Bad things can be said about women who adhere to Western cultural norms.  And the disabled are the victims of a world organized by the able-bodied.  But on the whole, it is white males who are expected to sit unperturbed through four years of professors’ rantings about their villainy. 
      “Sooner or later, minority cultures will be deconstructed like ‘white’ culture, and all the minority savants, who have been elevated by pulling down white ones, will also fall.
      “All of these Marxist offshoots masquerade as the latest sophistication, and they all imply a cleansing of one kind or another.  Marx thought that peace and justice would arrive when the working class exterminated the upper classes.  Lesbians believe nirvana comes when the male has no role in

society except as sperm donor for artificial insemination.
      “Many liberals, who should be turned off by these Balkanizing doctrines, support them for reformist purposes.  For example, the attacks on the white male are a way of advancing women and minorities with quotas.  The attack on heterosexuality is a way of coercing tolerance of homosexuals.
      “The problem is that once these doctrines of hate get into people’s consciousness, it is hard to get them out.  There will come a time when the well-meaning liberal, who tried to use hateful doctrines as reformist tools, finds himself in  a society overrun with hatreds.
      “Marx’s fulminations against the bourgeoisie don’t make any rational sense, but his fulminations fueled a class genocide that killed 60 million people in Russia and China.  The 19th-Century German intellectuals who deconstructed the Jews authored a racial holocaust that claimed 6 million lives.
      “Our college curriculums have many voices of hate busy at work preparing a future holocaust, but a voice of Christian love is considered too divisive to be tolerated.  Dartmouth College prohibited copies of C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity from being distributed as gifts to students.  A dean ruled that the book could be considered offensive.
      “Hate has such a hold that love dare not be mentioned.”
      Paul Craig Roberts, Human Events, May 7, 1999, p. 23

q    “I went to interview two Swedish leftists, a Cabinet minister in the ruling Social Democratic Party government and the chief economist for the Landsorganisationen, or LO, the principal Swedish trade union.  And they both harped on fairness, though in the nicest way...
      “The economist, Per-Olof Edin, told me, ‘Inequality creates violence and crime in the United States,’ And it probably does, although one can only wish it would create more violence toward Donald Trump.  Nor did this explain why, in Sweden, where there’s little inequality, crime has increased fourfold since 1950.  Mr. Edin said, ‘Enormous differences in income, wealth, and power push people toward communism.’  And maybe so, but the only people it pushed toward communism in America were ‘60s college students who already had income, wealth, and power – or at least their fathers did...
      “The Cabinet minister was Marita Ulvskog...whose portfolio was Minister for Consumer, Religious, Youth and Sports Affairs, and why not keep going with a title like that and make her Minister of Hobbies, Boardgames, Gardening and Affairs Among Middle-Aged Married People?...
      “ ‘We don’t want a society’, said Mrs. Ulvskog, ‘with large differences in income, in social welfare, in regions, in men and women.’  And good luck to the Social Democrats.  Try this with animals, and everything would be a cow.  Which may explain why the zoo in Stockholm does, in point of fact, have cows in it.”  
      PJ O’Rourke, Eat the Rich: A Treatise on Economics, Washington Times, October 5, 1998 P A2