Socialism And Genocide

1989 saw the collapse of international communism, but socialism as an idea managed to live on in other various forms. Amongst the highest political circles in Western societies, at places like the World Economic Forum, socialist views are still dominant.

It is in socialist countries, or even semi-socialist ones like Canada and some European countries, that evil ideas like euthanasia can gain political ground, and enter public policy and medical discourse.

Israel is politically able to carry out the genocide of the Palestinians not because of any theological justification given by Rabbis, or ancient racist hostility towards Arabs or Muslims, but because of its socialist worldview. Zionism was born in an age when communist theories of man were running rampant in Europe. It is a socialist movement just as much as a nationalist one.

In socialist societies people are classified into groups, and so killing enemy combatants wholesale in a state of war is psychologically easier than in free societies. Countries that prize individualism cannot politically justify the indiscriminate killing of innocents. 

It is a fact of history that the nations that committed the most mass murder in the 20th century were socialist. The exceptions to the rule were imperial Japan and the British empire, which killed millions via invasions, concentration camps, economic sabotage, and the engineering of famines. 

But, in general, making the leap to total warfare in a state of war was politically natural for socialist regimes more so than republican or monarchical ones.

And total war either leads to total victory or total defeat. There isn’t a middle ground. There isn’t any compromising with socialist and revolutionary fanatics. Negotiations is not in their vocabulary. 

And that political inflexibility is the cause of their ultimate downfall, regardless of the political system or country. History has shown that all socialist projects come to a disastrous end. 

China has only succeeded economically because it has recovered its ancient common sense, and moved away from socialism in the economic arena. It has prioritized trade and development over ideology to its great benefit.

The West took the wrong lessons from the rise of China, and the fall of Soviet Russia. As they became more free, the West has trended the other way, becoming more socialist in the last thirty five years.

In America the Democratic party is beginning to finally realize that socialism, and its offshoot crackpot ideas like identity politics, lead to a dead end politically. In the recent presidential election they based their whole election strategy on herd mentality, thinking Latinos would vote one way, or this or that ethno-cultural group would vote another way, only to find out on election day that most people do not behave like mindless cattle. The socialists lost once again.

It is a shame that Trump won, as he’s essentially a con man who loves flattery, proven by his first term in office, but as a political symbol he’s the antidote to the socialist spirit that has permeated the left so his victory is a good sign for the future. Individualism is still a winning pitch. That’s the good news. 

The future elections in Canada, Australia, and Europe will see a similar shift in politics, with socialist and leftist candidates receding further into political irrelevancy. 

But, we must remember that the Covid hoax was sold to the public by both sides of the political aisle so our societies won’t see fundamental change no matter which party is in power. 

The global depopulation agenda is transnational, transideological, and transpolitical. More wars are being scripted, more catastrophes are being planned. From weather warfare to engineered famines, the future is coming faster than expected and the re-election of Trump won’t change the psychotic elite’s planned trajectory for humanity. They might even choose to accelerate their evil agenda.

II.

An excerpt from, “The Lost Literature of Socialism” By Antony Flew, Foundation For Economic Education, September 1, 1999:

The literature of socialism is lost only in the sense of not having been read for a very long time. George Watson has been re-reading this literature as a professional literary critic, with strong interests in both political affairs and the history of ideas. Many of his findings are astonishing. Perhaps for readers today the most astonishing of all is that “In the European century that began in the 1840s, from Engels’ article of 1849 down to the death of Hitler, everyone who advocated genocide called himself a socialist and no conservative, liberal, anarchist or independent did anything of the kind.” (The term “genocide” in Watson’s usage is not confined to the extermination only of races or of ethnic groups, but embraces also the liquidation of such other complete human categories as “enemies of the people” and “the Kulaks as a class.”)

Although Watson himself unfortunately never defines the key word “socialism,” he is apparently following throughout the usage of the old British Labour Party. From its foundation, it proclaimed itself a socialist party and stated its aim in Clause IV of its constitution—thereafter printed on every membership card—as being “the public ownership of all the means of production, distribution and exchange.”

Watson distinguishes three periods in the history of this socialist idea. The first, the Age of Conception, runs from the 1840s to the Bolshevik coup of 1917; the second, the Age of Fulfilment, continues until the Communist seizure of power in China in 1949; the third, the Age of Decline, continues until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

Wikipedia:

George Grimes Watson (13 October 1927– 2 August 2013) was an anti-communist scholar, literary critic and historian. He was a fellow of St John’s College, Cambridge, and professor of English at Cambridge University.

. . .Watson contributed to Encounter, a Cold-War intellectual journal, and published material arguing that Adolf Hitler was a Marxist and that socialism promoted genocide. He was featured in the 2008 documentary film The Soviet Story where he argued that Karl Marx was responsible for coming up with the idea of genocide. For this, he was criticised by Latvian political scientist and cultural commentator Ivars Ijabs and Robert Grant, who argue that Watson’s views are based on mistranslation and distortion reflecting his ideological bias. The translation of Völkerabfälle as “racial trash” lay at the centre of this, with defenders of Marx and Friedrich Engels saying that a proper translation would be “residual fragments of peoples”.

In the Lost Literature of Socialism (1998), Watson cited an 1849 article written by Engels called “The Hungarian Struggle” and published in Marx’s journal Neue Rheinische Zeitung, stating that the writings of Engels and others show that “the Marxist theory of history required and demanded genocide for reasons implicit in its claim that feudalism, which in advanced nations was already giving place to capitalism, must in its turn be superseded by socialism. Entire nations would be left behind after a workers’ revolution, feudal remnants in a socialist age, and since they could not advance two steps at a time, they would have to be killed. They were racial trash, as Engels called them, and fit only for the dung-heap of history.”

Source: http://disquietreservations.blogspot.com/2024/11/socialism-and-genocide.html