Posted on 01/14/2006 1:26:25 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
There were many jews in government, in the universities, etc.
It was only when some jews began to insist upon practicing their religion.....NO RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION WAS ALLOWED IN THE SOVIET UNION...that things got ugly. Any request to emigrate out of the Soviet Union was a request to be 'housed' in a gulag.
BTTT
...and virtually all of them had a thing for religion, especially Christian religion, seeing it as the opiate of the masses, when in reality it shot down in no uncertain terms what they saw as counter reality. Truth is the enemy of any ideology that pretends there is no religion. The misguided, blind and dumb attempting to lead the same, and ultimately the fall of the structure built on a sandy foundation.
Rich and poor joined the Communist Party / Communist front groups because there was something in it for them. It was an organized path to something. It was something that they had and you did not.
Stupid capitalist workers just worked, produced, advanced on their own. Wouldn't a Capitalist Party be nice to join and be on the inside from the beginning? "Power to the Board!"
"Nonetheless, comprehending how fanaticism’s roots lie in alienation from society, hopeless living conditions, and a desire to advance an ideological, romantic or religious fantasy--and how attractive it is for people swept up in a secret world, especially young men, to commit crimes--is relevant to understanding and fighting terrorism."
Yes, it is indeed relevant to understand today's terrorism as Barr and Rosemberg's struggles were first and foremost religious struggles intent on destabilizing Christian societies, just as today's the jihadists' struggles are religious ones. The weapon of choice then was communism and pseudo economic alienation. Todays's weapons are different, but the struggles continue unabated. This truth is written on every American wall for anyone to see.
To know and accept the truth is to free oneself and their future progeny.
<< This article is tripe. Poverty or desperate situations is an excuse, not the cause of fanaticism. Nor does it explain the fact that most of the 19 hijackers on 911 and leaders of the terrorist movements come from well to do families. Marx was no pauper and certainly nor was Engels who was born wealthy. Lenin was from the lower nobility of Russia and Mao was from the "rich peasant" class of China. Castro, Che Guevara, the list goes on. No, only some of the "dupes" come from humble beginings but revolution is and laways has been the province of the pampered, spoiled upper Burgoisie. >>
Even the born with a silver-spoon-in-his-mouth mother's-boy traitor, Roosevelt typified the spoiled kid commy of which you accurately write. And just as the others' crazed totalitarian fanaticism was responsible for the disasters that became of their variously squalid states, so were Roosevelt's communist lite "New Deal" policies the cause of America's real, Roosevelt Depression. Which depression was at its worst in 1936-1937 and from which none of Roosevelt's totalitarian-socialist machinations rescued US.
Only World War Two did that.
ping
The point of the article is not to determine where these movements get their leaders but to understand how they find the "dupes" without whom the leaders would have no dangerous movement to lead. No one disputes what you say about the leaders of some of these movements, but the points you make are irrelevant to the subject at hand. The writer's point is that we need to understand what causes people to join these groups. That understanding isn't a prelude to excusing their evil actions, but understanding might help us to find weaknesses that we can use to defeat them.
Bill
"To quote Obi-Wan Kenobi,"
Are you providing quotes from a fictional movie character?
We are discussing real world events...not movies...or TV sitcoms...this is about REALITY.
If you have a serious point to make,feel free. Avoiding "play-like" references may aid your credibility. This is an adult disscussion.
Have a nice life.
Just briefed over your irrational sensationalistic slogans and comic book diatribes.
You only appear to sound like you know what you are talking about.
But,your thoughts are a gooey mess of left-wing anti-government utterances strung sloppily into an inedible gumbo of incoherence...much like a Tourette's victim overdosed on drugs.
You are going to need real help in returning to reality.
I would add, they deserved every watt they got.
Second, this notion by eastern Euros bamboozled by communism that capitalism could not lead to wealth seems somewhat contradicted by Leon Trotsky's writings, wherein he came to NYC and observed that even the poorest in America had an apartment that was only enjoyed by the richest in Russia.
Sometimes on religious issues, you have to ask (say, in Tom Cruise's case, or Madonna's) why to they REFUSE to believe? They know better. They aren't stupid. They have the information. But as doubting Thomas said to the disciples, "I will NOT believe unless . . . ." They choose, willfully, to stick their middle finger in the face of God, or, in the Rosenbergs' case, in the face of obvious evidence that their false god had failed.
I don't know if you've read his memoir (Commies), but it really is fascinating to discover how he made the transition from being a Red diaper baby to a staunch anti-Communist.
I hadn't known many of the details surrounding his purge from academe-beyond the fact that CUNY faculty and administration began to blackball him the moment he started to raise doubts about the innocence of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg-so reading that autobiography was extremely edifying.
The PSC is still filled with radical left Communist apologists today, and still unwilling to defend non-leftist scholars whose careers are imperiled.
I can't think of a more vivid illustration of this tendency than the case of (K.C.) Johnson, my former American history professor at Brooklyn College.
His struggle to gain tenure-in spite of the obstacles placed in his path by fanatical, dogmatic anti-American colleagues like Stuart Schaar-I don't recall the name of the chair of my alma mater's history dept. off the top of my head-is illuminating, insofar as it demonstrates how far we've come from the days when that same college denied these same sectarian leftists and absolutists the opportunity to dictate policy.
In fact, one of my political science professors even besmirched the namesake of Boylan Hall, because that president had the temerity to tackle the subject of Communist apologists on campus.
(I have kept up my end with a, humbly, phenomenal publishing record and pretty good teaching)
But I do advise grad students (esp. conservatives) to SHUT UP until they get tenure. Go through the hoops, "talk the talk," if you have to. Once you're in, they can't touch you.
Congrats. Where there is a will there is a way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.