it is written in the crude English style, this is the book which contains the basis in natural science for our view."  Marx expresses the same sentiment in a letter to Lassalle, claiming that The Origin of Species "is very important and serves me as a natural scientific basis for the class struggle in history."  John Hoffman tells us that Marx so admired Darwin’s work that he "sent Darwin a complimentary copy of Volume I of Capital and tried unsuccessfully to dedicate Volume II to him." 
      Marxists are well aware that Marx depended on Darwin’s theory of evolution for his materialistic and social/historical worldview. F. V. Konstantinov, in The Fundamentals of Marxist-Leninist Philosophy, states, "It was the discovery of the law of the conservation of energy, of the unitary cellular structure of all living organisms, and Darwin’s theory of the evolution of biological species that provided the foundation on which Marx and Engels built dialectical materialism."  Theodosius Dobzhansky gave a paper in 1974 entitled "The Birth of the Genetic Theory of Evolution in the Soviet Union in the 1920s." In this paper Dobzhansky made it clear that while some scientists in the U.S.S.R. have reservations about certain aspects of Darwinian theory, they "still accepted evolution as part of the new gospel." He further said, "Evolution was accepted not only as a scientific theory but also as a part of the liberal worldview. . . . [S]tandard bearers of the radical youth proclaimed that a valid personal philosophy must rest on a solid base of natural science, and evolution was a pivotal part of that." 
      Why do Marxists embrace the theory of evolution so readily? Partially because it provides a picture of man’s origin that is largely consistent with the Marxist dialectic and supports the Marxist notion that man’s social history is a constant and continuing process. In fact, the Marxist theory of history and society is merely an extension and distortion of Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Darwin, Marx, and Society
Marx believed that Darwin’s evolutionary theory could be extended naturally to answer questions about human society. He felt that society, like life itself, had gone through an evolutionary process and must continue to undergo such a process until a classless society evolved. Marx integrated this notion of evolution into his worldview, writing, "Darwin has interested us in the history of Nature’s technology, i.e. in the formation of the organs of plants and animals, which organs serve as instruments of production for sustaining life. Does not the history of the productive organs of man, of organs that are the material basis of all social organization, deserve equal attention?"  Engels makes the claim even more straight-forward: "Just as Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of evolution in human history." 
      This claim has been reaffirmed throughout Marxism’s development. V. I. Lenin echoes the founding fathers, stressing the scientific nature of their theory:

Just as Darwin put an end to the view of animal and plant species being unconnected, fortuitous, "created by God" and immutable, and was the first to put biology on an absolutely scientific basis by establishing the mutability and the succession of species, so Marx put an end to the view of society being a mechanical aggregation of individuals which allows of all sorts of modification at the will of the authorities (or, if you like, at the will of society and the government) and which emerges and changes casually, and was the first to put sociology on a scientific basis by establishing the concept of the economic formation of society as the sum-total of given production relations, by establishing the fact that the development of such formations is a process of natural history. 

Leon Trotsky says that "taken in the broadly materialist and dialectical sense, Marxism is the application of Darwinism to human society."  G. V. Plekhanov sees Marxism as "Darwinism in its application to social science."  Obviously, virtually all Marxists perceive Darwin’s theory of evolution as an essential pillar in their communist worldview. This is due largely to the fact that it complements their social and historical theory so well; but of course, there is another, more important reason.

Darwin and Teleology
Just as the notion of God destroys the Humanist theo-logy, the slightest hint of God is directly opposed to the Marxist theology. Atheism, as we have seen in Marxist/Leninist theology, is the very core of Marxist theory—their worldview is only consistent and coherent without God in the picture. As soon as one acknowledges the existence of God, or even of the supernatural, Marxism crumbles. Therefore, Marx and his followers eagerly embraced a theory that makes God unnecessary for the origin of life.
      Marx proclaims, "Darwin’s volume is very important . . . not only is the death-blow dealt here for the first time to ‘teleo-logy’ in the natural sciences but their rational meaning is empirically explained."  Engels is especially aware of the ramifications of Darwin’s theory: "Darwin must be named before all others. He dealt the metaphysical conception of nature the heaviest blow by his proof that all organic beings, 

continued on page 7

The Allies of Communism,
Part II
by Dr. Fred C. Schwarz

Editor’s Note: We are continuing the list of evidence to prove that Communism does not need a great number of Communists, but as Lenin said "fewer but better." Read on to complete the article started last month.

3. The Educational Evidence
By a tremendous concentration on education, the Communists are today graduating in Russia alone three times as many engineers and scientists as the United States. When their China program matures, they will graduate ten times as many. They are graduating, at a rough estimate, one hundred times as many language specialists. When their China program matures, their linguistic superiority will be astronomical.
      A common reaction to this information is to draw comfort from the fact that in Communist countries there is no academic freedom. One of the great delusions of American educators has been that academic freedom is necessary for the achievement of material results. If a child is trained in habits of study, and then forced to study mathematics, science, and foreign languages, he will learn a lot whether the system is free or not. Regimentation and tyranny have always been able to achieve great things. The pharaohs built the pyramids; the Chinese built the Great Wall of China; Hitler achieved miracles in Germany, and there is no evidence whatsoever that he had any trouble controlling his educated classes. Under an authoritarian system of regimented education, the Germans made tremendous progress in the science of rocketry and electronics, and in the development of the jet aircraft. In a similar way, the Communists with their emphasis on science, foreign languages, and mathematics, are making tremendous progress. It is not a question of which system of education develops better balanced personalities. The question is: Which system of education will win this universal war?
      I was visiting an American college. Before I had been there ten minutes, the president told me with great pride of a young man who had brought glory and honor to their school. Wherever I went on the campus, I heard his praises sung. At last I met him, and a fine young man he was. His body was lithe and slender, and he stood some six feet two inches tall. He was their leading basketball player. His skill at the game was so great that he had been chosen to go to Melbourne, Australia, to represent the United States in the Olympic Games in 1956. What an honor for the school!
      But when I asked, "Who is your leading science student?" He looked at me in wonder and amazement. He 

could not answer the question. To find out information like that a careful study of the records would be required.
      I want to make it quite clear that I have nothing against basketball. I think it is a splendid sport. The ability to project accurately an inflated spherical ball through an iron hoop is a remarkable gift indeed. However, it is difficult to envisage how ballistic missiles can be effectively stopped with basketballs. Faced as we are with a struggle for survival against an enemy who spares no effort to educate the young in those fields which will help to secure victory, it would seem that the scale of values in the American educational system might well be revised.

4. The Economic Evidence
The great problem lies in the percentage of the Russian economic product that is available to the Communists for class warfare. Because the Communist Party has a monopoly ownership of the entire Russian economic product, it can use the economic product as it will. Because of their monopoly ownership, the Communists can decide how much the individual Russian may have, and how much of the total product will be retained to be used in economic warfare against the United States. By keeping the people at a very low standard of living, they are able to use a large proportion of their economic product to destroy American foreign markets by underselling the American product.
      Monopoly has a tremendous advantage in competition with small industry. Unprotected by law, no small concern with only a few employees could stand against any of the great national corporations. Were it not for the protection afforded by antitrust laws, a big chain store could very easily put out of operation the little grocer on the corner. All the chain store would need to do would be to open up a market nearby. Since this market would be only one of hundreds owned by them, they would not need to make a profit. They could undersell on every line. Their little competitor, however, has limited financial resources. He has to make a profit to pay his debts and to carry on his business. The time he can compete is limited. In time his resources are exhausted and he is forced to close down.
      The Communists are doing a similar thing on a world scale. They can move into any American foreign market they consider desirable. They do not need to make a profit; their profit is in the chaos they create in the American economy, in the agents they infiltrate into the country through their trade.
      An example of Communist techniques of economic warfare may be seen in their activities in Iraq. Iraq had vast sums secured from oil royalties to be invested in developmental projects. A large number of the contracts for these projects went to Russia. To secure a contract, the Communists followed this simple procedure: they found out from pro-Communist elements in the Iraqi government the lowest bid made by any Western firm, and tendered a bid 

twenty per cent below it. They did not need to make a profit directly for their profit was in the Communist agents they infiltrated and the subversive literature they distributed, as well as in the weakening of the American economy. It is difficult to see how any concern that must make a profit to survive can compete against them.
      The advancing Communist economic penetration is causing grave concern among business leaders and the government authorities. The situation grows more serious year by year.

5. The Evidence in the Field of Communications
The world is divided into three major areas: there is the Communist area, a great prison containing a billion slaves; there is what is known as the Free World, consisting of America and her allies; and between these two, there is the vast, uncommitted area of the world which numbers [more than] one billion people. This uncommitted area is composed primarily of the new nations of Asia and Africa. With them should be included the nations of Central and South America. These countries are the great battle ground between East and West. If the Communists secure them, they will have two billion and their superiority will be absolute. If the Free World can keep them outside the Communist fold, there may be some hope of maintaining the present unstable balance of power.
      The peoples of these countries are being wooed and won by the Communists, not with bombs and bullets, but with words and books. One hundred people are being reached with Communist lies for every one being reached with the Christian or the democratic truth. The Communists are engaged in the greatest literature crusade mankind has ever known. They are producing beautiful literature in almost every language and distributing it in every corner of the earth. In many countries this literature costs practically nothing. An example of this is Problems of Leninism by Joseph Stalin. This book of more than eight hundred pages may be purchased in a Communist bookstore in America for four dollars: in Canada it costs a dollar and fifty cents; in Australia, it costs seventy cents; in India or Japan it may be purchased for ten cents. The price charged has no relationship to the cost of production; it is related merely to the economic capacity of the purchasers.
      An example of their beautiful color magazines is China Pictorial, which is printed in Peking every two weeks in  

Chinese, Mongolian, Tibetan, Uighur, Korean, English, Russian, German, French, Japanese, Viet-namese, Indonesian,
Hindi, Spanish, Arabic and Burmese. Every face wears a radiant smile. The color photography is beautiful. The moral tone is excellent: there is no violence, no crime, no nakedness, no sex, and no alcohol. Every page portrays abundance, beauty, prosperity, liberty and peace. You cannot look through such a magazine without being impressed.
      How thoroughly the Communists are carrying out this literary crusade is indicated by the children’s books which they are producing in practically every language. Visit any Communist bookstore in the United States and you will find books printed in Moscow and Peking in English for one, two and three-year-old babies. These have titles such as The Rose and the Earthworm, The Golden Ass, The Little Bird Who Hurt His Wing, The Caterpillar, Punchy the Elephant, Chickens and Ears, The Lamb and the Wolf, The Ant and the Grasshopper, The Adventures of the Little Swallow, How the Monkeys Reached for the Moon, Beautiful Leaves, Wow-wow’s House, Tolstoy’s Short Stories. The Communists want the children. They do not care so much about the adults whom they consider as already contaminated with the disease of Capitalism and consequently of little use to them. When the Communists rule the world, the diseased social classes will have to be eliminated. But the children are different. They can do something with them. This children’s literature is a preliminary step towards winning the children of the world.
      An examination of some of the children’s literature produced by the Communists induces bewilderment in most loyal Americans, for they can discover nothing wrong with these books. The stories are well told, beautifully illustrated, and do not teach Communism in any way. The trouble with these books is that there is nothing wrong with them.
      If a kidnapper wishes to gain the confidence of a child to entice her into an automobile for dreadful purposes, he does not give a long lecture about what will happen after she gets into the automobile. He gives her candy to win her confidence. The candy he gives is not bitter or poisoned candy, for the sweeter and better the candy, the greater the likelihood that the child will get into the automobile. These children’s books are the Communist literary candy with which the Communists are endeavoring to entice the children of the world into the Communist automobile for their journey into slavery and death.

Richard Wurmbrand: Voice of the Martyrs
by Joseph Farah

The New York Times claims to be the newspaper of record — proudly boasting it covers "all the news that’s fit to print."
      The Times takes particular care to note all significant obituaries around the world.
      But the newspaper of record — and, indeed, the entire U.S. establishment press — missed a big passing last month.
      I’m talking about Richard Wurmbrand, who spent 14 years in Romanian prisons for following Jesus Christ in a Communist country that persecuted Christians and the founder of the mission that became known as Voice of the Martyrs.
      Wurmbrand went home to be with his Lord Feb. 17 at the age of 91.
      From the first day he became a Christian, Wurmbrand had a burden to witness his faith to Russians. He got his chance when the Russians invaded Romania. He, his wife and son often visited with the soldiers and brought them Bibles.
      But, soon, it became dangerous business to talk about the Christian faith in Romania. He found himself in prison, subject to constant torture by authorities who demanded he confess to political crimes against the state.
      He got out of prison in 1964 and testified before the U.S. Congress two years later.
      At one point in his dramatic testimony, he stripped to the waist to show 18 deep scars on his neck, chest and back.
      "My body represents Romania, my country, which has been tortured to a point that it can no longer weep," he explained. "These marks on my body are my credentials."
      Wurmbrand recounted his prison ordeal in the 1968 book, In God’s Underground — sleep deprivation; starvation diet; forced to race around his tiny cell for hours until he collapsed; beatings with truncheons and boots; water funneled down his throat until it filled his stomach, which was then violently kicked; the soles of his feet flogged Inquisition-style; guards urinating and spitting into his open mouth; drugged into delirium; terrorized by dogs kept inches from his throat; three years of solitary confinement.
      "It was an image of hell," Wurmbrand reported, "in which the torment is eternal and you cannot die." He confessed to any false charges concerning himself — adultery, homosexuality — but steadfastly refused to implicate other believers, irrespective of denomination.
      While in prison, Wurmbrand learned that his wife had 

been arrested in 1950 and pressed into slave labor digging and carting dirt for the Danube-Black Sea canal, a project eventually abandoned as infeasible. Held for three years, she ate grass for survival when necessary.
      Wurmbrand himself was released in 1956, and rejoined his wife, Sabina, and his son, Mihai, in Bucharest. But rather than live quietly, Wurmbrand resumed his preaching of Christianity.
      "I knew, of course," he wrote, "that sooner or later I would be rearrested."
      Less than three years later, he was re-imprisoned during a renewed crackdown on the clergy. He was sentenced to his original 20 years at hard labor, plus five more years.
      Upon his release, where Wurmbrand began his ministry in the name of what he came to call the Underground Church, which comprised members of all Christians persecuted under Communist governments — regimes he referred to collectively as "the Beast of the Apocalypse." Throughout Europe and the United States, where he and his family eventually settled in 1966 (they became naturalized U.S. citizens in 1971), the pastor railed publicly against Communists’ brutal treatment of Christians. He also attacked free-world church leaders, whom he accused of complacency, accommodation and gullibility regarding "easing of religious oppression" behind the Iron Curtain.
      Wurmbrand established Jesus to the Communist World, Inc., in Glendale, Calif., in 1967 to address the needs of the international Underground Church. Wurmbrand served as president, and in 1990 the group officially changed its name to Voice of the Martyrs, Inc. With branches in 35 nations, VOM still engages in a variety of missionary and relief activities, notably Bible smuggling.
      Wurmbrand published more than a dozen books, among them 1967’s best-selling "Tortured for Christ"; 1975’s "My Answer to the Moscow Atheists"; and my favorite, the eternal "Marx and Satan," which shows that Communism’s founders had their own very religious foundation — occultic Satanism.
      After Romanians toppled Communist tyrant Nicolae Ceausescu on Christmas Day 1989, Richard, age 80, and Sabina, 76, returned to their homeland. Greeted as heroes, they preached, appeared on television and visited one of Wurmbrand’s former cells, now used as a library for his many books.
      Despite that heroic, dramatic life, he died in relative obscurity in Torrance, Calif., last month.
      However, he will not be forgotten here

—WorldNetDaily, March 20, 2001

Jesse: Black, Blue, and Red?
by Joseph Farah

We’ve found out in recent weeks that Jesse Jackson is a financial chiseler and a marital cheat.
      What most Americans still don’t know about him is that he is also in bed with the American Stalinists of the Communist Party USA.
      Here’s the evidence of what I charge:

In the January 1984 edition of Political Affairs, "the theoretical journal of the Communist Party USA," self-described "Harlem organizer for the New York Communist Party" Kevin Mercadel boasted, "Our ’84 electoral activity began with the formation of the Rainbow Coalition in Harlem in support of Jesse Jackson’s campaign for the presidency." Mercadel added that the Communists were not only allowed to work in the coalition, "but, indeed, it was expected of us."

One of Jackson’s top organizers is Jack O’Dell, who served as director of international affairs of the National Rainbow Coalition. He is also a Communist Party USA veteran.
      The late Gus Hall, longtime boss of the Communist Party USA, endorsed Jackson’s presidential campaign in 1988, as the height of "a new level of united independent political action, within and outside the Democratic Party," he said in the September-October 1988 edition of Political Affairs.
      In the July 1989 edition of Political Affairs, John Holme, chairman of the Northern California political action commission of the party, wrote, "Like many of the campaigns in which Communists play an active role, the Jackson ’88 campaign was an ‘inner Democratic Party struggle.’"
      In the March 1989 edition of Political Affairs, James Steele, a member of the executive committee of the party, wrote, "If we Communists are not prejudiced by form; if we do not have a jaundiced attitude toward inner-Democratic party struggles, our party can make a unique contribution toward helping the Rainbow achieve its goal of consolidating a mass membership organization corresponding to the size of its electoral support."

      The July 1988 edition of Political Affairs notes, "In Pittsburgh, separatism was disguised with charges that ‘white communist elements’ took over the Jackson campaign." Apparently, even the Michael Dukakis campaign realized just how deeply infiltrated and compromised was the Jackson campaign.
      Jackson was the keynote speaker at a 1985 commemoration of the 10th anniversary of "the liberation of Vietnam" sponsored by the Communist Party USA, according to the Daily World, May 7, 1985 edition.
      Jackson was again the star of a Berkeley symposium July 20, 1984, sponsored by the Marxist Black Scholar magazine and including presentations by three CPUSA leaders.
      I could go on and on. Jackson may not be an official, card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA, but he could not be serving the group’s interests more if he was. The Communists love him. He’s been their standard-bearer in electoral politics and grass-roots community organizing for at least 15 years.
      More importantly, suggests the voluminous coverage Jackson has received in the official Communist press, he represents the party’s best political hope to hijack the Democratic Party for its own purposes.
      Study the issues. See if you can detect even the slightest disagreement or conflict between the positions of the Communist Party and the Rev. Jesse Jackson. I dare you. You won’t find much. They are strong political allies because they agree 99 percent of the time.
      Of course, it’s nothing new for the Communist Party to work within the Democratic Party. They did it with Franklin D. Roosevelt. Then they split along with Henry Wallace. But they came back into the Democratic Party political fold in 1972, when George McGovern got the nomination. And they have been there ever since — sometimes working directly on behalf of the nominee, as they did with Al Gore in 2000, and sometimes working for a dissident like Jackson.
      But no "mainstream" political leader in U.S. history has ever cozied up quite so close to the Communists as Jackson.
      Crook, cheat, commie with a small "c" — does Jesse Jackson need to collect any more baggage before we dismiss him and his discredited, statist, collectivist ideas from the national debate?

—WorldNetDaily, March 27, 2001

representation of the universe, of its evolution, of the development of mankind, and of the reflection of this 
evolution in the minds of men, can only be obtained by methods of dialectics."  And we read in The Fundamentals of Marxist-Leninist Philosophy that "Marx and Engels assessed Darwin’s evolutionary theory as dialectical-materialist in its essence. . . ." 
      Darwin’s theory of evolution appeared especially dialectical to the Marxists for the specific reason that it portrays development as a process. For example, Engels writes,

Precisely the infinite, accidental differences between individuals within a single species, differences which become accentuated until they break through the character of the species, and whose immediate causes even can be demonstrated only in extremely few cases, compelled [Darwin] to question the previous basis of all regularity in biology, viz., the concept of species in its previous metaphysical rigidity and unchangeability. 

Elsewhere, Engels discusses the work of Darwin and discoveries regarding the nature of protoplasm and cells, concluding: "The new outlook on nature was complete in its main features; all rigidity was dissolved, all fixity dissipated, all particularity that had been regarded as eternal became transient, the whole of nature was shown as moving in eternal flux and cyclical course."  This eternal flux is important for the Marxist worldview, for as Engels says, "The world is not to be comprehended as a complex of ready-made things, but as a complex of processes." 
      Another reason why Darwin’s theory seemed to reinforce dialectics was that it called for the evolution of the simple to the more complex. Marxist dialectics states that process is always spiraling upward—that the synthesis is always a more advanced stage than the previous thesis. Apparently, Darwin’s theory of natural selection calls for the same thing—more advanced species better suited to live in their environment, nature accumulating the good and disposing of the bad. Thus, when Joseph Stalin says "that the process of development should be understood, not as movement in a circle, not as a simple repetition of what has already occurred, but as an onward and upward movement, as a transition from an old qualitative state to a new qualitative state, as a development from the simple to the complex, from the lower to the higher,"  he seems to echo precisely how Darwin described the evolutionary development of the species.