All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned. ~ Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto
In these brief yet portentous sentences, Marx states the essence of the spirit of communism that haunts the West. All values and social relations that a well-bred man would have considered to be sane and normal are now denied. Yet even as new relations arise to displace the old, they in turn will give way to new ones before they can ossify. Thus, the progressive is never satisfied, there is always some novelty just over the horizon. No progressive held it against Obama, for example, when he opposed same sex marriage. As expected, Obama “evolved” on the issue, without explanation, without accusations of “flip flopping”.
Everything solid refers to formal causes, the notion that people, conditions, things, and events are manifestations of fixed ideas. The ideas evaporate and take abode in some non-existent heaven, leaving their former manifestations without firm boundaries, and thus merge into each other in an ever increasing lack of manifestation. Of course, all that is holy also evaporates; however, it is insufficient to let it run its natural course, rather it must be mocked, profaned, and combated.
At one time I knew many Marxists, but today no one admits to being one. However, I know how and what Marxists think, and many think the same thoughts today without realizing their true source. The genius of Marx is that he understood how this process would take root, not in undeveloped areas as Lenin and Mao presumed, but rather as the natural development of advanced capitalist societies.
The Spectre of Communism
Marx perceived clearly the spectre of communism, or we would say its egregore; he nourished it, defined it, promoted it, until subtly it has grown in psychic strength and manifested as the wandering influence in the minds of many in our day. An egregore is a psychic thoughtform infecting a like-minded group of human beings from whom it draws its life. It then amplifies the thoughts of its component members, returning to them much more strongly. That is why the thoughts of progressives have such a high affective element, while lacking intellectual coherence.
The egregore controls their thoughts, which they are unaware of. That is why progressives can suddenly, and even simultaneously, adopt the same cause without outward collusion. As the Proverb says,
the locusts fly in formation even though they have no king. And the devouring locusts are relentless, sweeping aside indiscriminately every venerable and hoary truth and profaning anything holy.
Social and Political Disorder
Now consider these general principles. Are they held only by open communists, or to some extent by anyone who calls himself a liberal or a progressive? The answer is clear. Of course, by the logic of progressivism, those who balk today at the more extreme elements of these principles may very well adopt them tomorrow.
- They support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things.
- They disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions.
- They attack every principle of existing society.
- Abolition of the family
The progressive intellectuals attack the bourgeoisie from above while supporting every movement that attacks it from below. In the USA, there are increasingly loud voices advocating forcible overthrow: eliminate the constitution, ignore the bill of rights, rule by decree (executive order or regulations) rather than law, appeal to the masses directly over congress, destroy political opponents.
What principle is immune? Even the boy scouts must be coerced to yield. The family is attacked by calling everything “family”. Existing (bourgeois) society likes guns, since it has always been the right of a free man to bear arms. Hence, guns must be opposed. Existing society is completely dependent on petroleum energy, hence oil must be opposed. I’m sure readers can easily add to this list.
The Battle against the Bourgeoisie
The battle of the progressive and communist left is against the bourgeoisie because it is the source of the moral and physical strength of previously existing society. Since it was European men who created this bourgeois society, they are deemed to be the enemy. This brings in a racial element, since it seems that white men are the enemy, but that element is derivative, an epiphenomenon. White progressives are not considered to be the enemy, just those who persist in maintaining the existing order of things. To make race the primary element is to misunderstand the essence of the fight; that will lead to wrong-headed efforts to oppose the revolution.
The Battle against Christianity
The bourgeoisie is also Christian, or at least culturally Christian. Hence, the revolution must be openly anti-Christian. The evidence for this is abundant, even among those who are not overtly or consciously Marxist. Unfortunately, those who only see the racial component are often themselves anti-Christian, thus inadvertently aiding the revolution.
This battle is not only open, but also subversive. Marx cynically claimed:
Nothing is easier than to give Christian asceticism a Socialist tinge.
In this way, the revolution can recruit, and has recruited, Christian elements to do this work. Of course, in Tradition, Christian asceticism applies only to those who choose such a lifestyle, typically as monks. The counsels of perfection include obedience, poverty and celibacy. Clearly socialism is not promoting any of those counsels, so this alleged socialist tinge is bogus, albeit very effective.
The Bourgeois Counterrevolution
Since the power of the bourgeoisie was the result of a revolution against the earlier feudal system, it cannot act as the bulwark against the revolution. That is why bourgeois parties always continue the leftward drift. In effect, they already contain some of the premises of Marxism. We see why Marx was led to conclude that Marxism follows inevitably from capitalism, and not from the earlier spiritual tradition which was opposed to both revolutionary movements. We can list three here as examples.
Bourgeois capitalism is thoroughly international, and Marx mentions this several times in the Manifesto, if anyone cares to look it up.
For bourgeois capitalism, the economy is primary. It even serves as the highest unifying principle, transcending even spiritual matters. Obviously, this is contrary to Tradition, for which the economic class is subservient to the spiritual authorities. We can refer to Voltaire in this matter:
[At the London Stock Exchange], men of all religions treat with one another without asking in whom or in what they believe and give the name of infidel only to those who go bankrupt.
Women in Common
One of the more scandalous ideas of the Manifesto was that of women in common. Obviously, that has come to pass and now appears normal. But, that was not so in the 19th century. Yet Marx shrewdly observed:
Bourgeois marriage is, in reality, a system of wives in common.
Divorce and remarriage is an example that system, and is widely accepted even among the bourgeois elements today.
The bourgeois parties of today frame their arguments in terms of the untenability of the programs of the left. They naively argue that the national debt cannot increase without limit, that green energy programs will not work, that gun control will not reduce crime, and so on. All this is true, but sadly misses the point. The left claims to be based on science and intelligence, which point to progress; hence, anything that opposes that progression is ipso facto unscientific. In his recent inauguration address, Obama outlined a program, very little of which could be justified on rational and objective scientific grounds. Marx anticipated this, and the locusts follow, consciously or unconsciously:
Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production. [my emphasis]
The measures are not intended to be sufficient and tenable; hence, the bourgeois party misses the point totally and fails as a rational opposition. Programs such as progressive income tax, government-controlled healthcare, green energy, carbon credits, food stamps, and so many others are not intended to promote free and prosperous economic activity. Their intent is simply to make “inroads” into free activity, to limit such activity, with the ultimate goal of “revolutionising the mode of production”. This is the “open secret” of Marxism.