I've just been reading a psycho article titled "The Frankfurt School:
Conspiracy to Corrupt" that I ran across while researching Marcuse. So
I welcome your observations.
Apparently the christian right believes The New Left wants to
demasculate American males and institute matriarchy -- by means of
feminism and removal of the father's ultimate authority in the family.
Sex education in schools is a leftist conspiracy too, a "vehicle for
secular humanism" How many people I wonder subscribe to these beliefs?
I am shocked. I thought the birthers were bad enough, but there is a
lot more madness where that came from.
In fact this is not irrelevant to TSE. He spoke against Russell's
atheism as a threat to society.
Sent from my iPod
On Jan 21, 2010, at 3:21 PM, Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Oh well. I and others have discussed at great length over several
> the following points, but I don't have the energy this week to try to
> develop any of them in a post or posts for this list. Since this
> discussion, despite its lack of relevance to Eliot, seems to be
> continuing, perhaps the following naked propositons will at least
> some new or different bones to chew. As offered here they are
> oversimplified and undeveloped, so it would be redundant to point that
> In U.S. history, significant social cchange has occurred only as a
> direct or indirect result of the actions of a minority acting outside
> the electoral system. This is true even of the obvious exception,
> Licoln's administration. The _very_ small abolitionist movement
> (interlnked with the intrnational left, freaked the Slavedrivers out
> their ever-loving minds, so that they split the Democratic Party _and_
> when as a result a candidate pledge NOT to interfere with slavery but
> only to limit its exent was elected, they split the Union and the
> consequent Civil War brought about the abolition of slavery. It is
> doubtful that without John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry Lincoln
> have been elected.
> The politician most resonsible for the passign of the Civil Rights
> legilation in the '60s was a racist pig, Republican Senator Everett
> Dirksen, who proclaimed it an idea whose time had come. By this he
> "those people" (inclujding rioters in Watts) are going to make the
> nation near to ugovernable if we don't try to satisfy them to some
> Last year, in a speech to a Bankers group, Obama told them "I'm the
> only thing standing between you and tghe men in pitchforks." Whether
> that is true or not at the present time, it accurately indicates the
> role the DP has played for over a century in blunting and absorbing
> social protest movements. It is the great barrier to significant
> in the United States. (The Kennedy brothers, for example, worked
> hard to
> head off both the March on Washinggton and the growth of the
> Fredom Democratic Party. Fortunately they failed.
> The Populist Movement died when it was absorbed into the DP.
> Roosevelt's creation of social security was mainly to head off the
> gathering popularity of the Townsend Plan. The only really new
> his Administration was the creation of the WPA, which was already
> replaced by the PWA when the war made both unnecessary. Roosevelt
> brought on renewed unemployment in 1938 by his moves towards balancing
> the budget.
> The Nixon Administration followed the geneal strtegy of Bismack a
> century ealier. It was two-pronged, and intended to bring the '60s
> movement to a halt. On the one hand, a considerable batch of
> legilation (e.g. OSHA). On the other hand the lauching of a program
> build the machinerery of repression, the political wrapping of which
> the War on Drugs. (Clinton and Bush both 'improved' that repressive
> machinery, especially Clinton with his "Effective Death Penalty and
> Anti-Terrorism Act." He also "ended welfare as we have known it," with
> much (unreported) misery since then. Probably Monica saved Social
> Secuity. (Nixon had planned in 1969 to drop a nuclear bomb on the
> Chinese installations in North Vietnam through which aid from China
> the USSR reached North Vietnam. He was demoralized by the size and
> miltancy of the November Moratorium that year and changed his plans.
> anti-war movment, however, was already weakening, and was dealt its
> deathblow by the presidential candidacy of George McGovern.
> The conservative swing of u.s. politics began with several actions by
> the Carte Administration:
> 1. His refusal to anwer a letter from Bishop Romero, leading to the
> murder of Romero and the beginning of the U.S. ravaging of the
> people of
> Central America
> 2. His sponsoring of Indonesia's campaign of terror in East Timor
> ( the
> weapons for that coming frm the United States)
> 3. Airline deregulation
> 4. Appointment of Vokcker as Fed Chairman
> 5. His launching of the Afghanistan War through CIA intervention.
> 6. Allowing the ex-Shah to come to the U.S. and his insane intended
> helicopter 'rescue' operation.
> In human history as in human evolution* Contingency remains in many
> the decisive factor. (*Cf. the asteroid that destroyed the diosaurs,
> making room for mamals and thus eventually for primates.) Mass social
> movements cannot be willed into existence, though their appearance may
> be deflected or delayed by the 10s of thousands of well-meaning people
> who remained attached to thefutile hope of social change through the
> election of "good people."
> P.S. A perhaps apocryphal but perhaps actual anecdote in Illinois
> politics. A man goes to an Alderman's offie in Chcago to request
> in running for some local or state election. The Alderman asks, "Who
> sent you?" The man replies, "No one sent me, I came on my own." "We
> don't talk to somebody nobody sent." Someone sent Obama when he ran
> the State Senate?
> In 1948 (and this is hard history) Stevenson wanted to run for the
> Senate; dogulas wanted to run for Governor. Jake Arvey said, no,
> run for Senate, Tevenson for Governor. Jake Arvy was an attorney fot
> Chicago Mob, and involved in their move to Las Vegas.