'COMMUNISM AND FASCISM---
It favors actions over intellectual reason,
We have identified INSIDE HIGHER EDUCATION as a global banking 1% neo-liberal corporate education reform installing COMMONER CORE AND PRE-K TO CAREER APPRENTICESHIPS replacing our strong left social progressive public K-UNIVERSITY.
'PUBLIC' FOR FAR-RIGHT GLOBAL CORPORATE FASCISM-----IS MARXISM.
LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSSIVE academics are called CRITICS---NEGATIVE-----while THOUGHT academics are called PROGRESSIVE. This is what we hear in Baltimore public surveillance THE NETWORK all the time-----CRITIC vs BEING POSITIVE AND PROGRESSIVE.
Why academics should strive to be public intellectuals, not ...www.insidehighered.com/views/2017/07/11/why... But in defining thought leaders as “creators” and public intellectuals as “critics,” Drezner prepares the ground for a “symbiosis,” in which evangelical thought leaders, perhaps too boldly, propose new ideas, while public intellectuals and the academics who think like them “analyze and criticize thought leaders.”
The Ideas Industry - Paperback - Daniel W. Drezner - Oxford ...global.oup.com/academic/product/the-ideas... Daniel W. Drezner. Filled with engaging and witty stories about the foibles of contemporary intellectual life in the US; Argues that the traditional public intellectual has been supplanted by a new model: the "thought leader" Identifies the forces driving this shift, including increasing inequality and political polarization
Why academics should strive to be public intellectuals, not thought leaders (essay)
Despite Daniel Drezner’s arguments to the contrary, now is not the “worst of times” for public intellectuals, Jonathan Marks argues'.
When we read these articles using the PHRASE 'PUBLIC ACADEMIC' most people in US think of our US PUBLIC SCHOOL and teachers----DREZNER is corrupting this phrase---for DREZNER, 'public' means MARXIST.....communism and fascism.
'why do communists & fascists hate intellectuals - EliteFitness
www.elitefitness.com/forum/chat-amp-conversation/... in the 30's-70's, radical right wing & left wingers hated intellectuals. Why would you do that? Is it because fascism & communism were considered to be parties of the working class? is there resentment over the fact that intellectuals don't do manual labor. I read some nazi propaganda once (from the 30s) blasting the jews because they were educated'.
'Communism and Fascism: The Reason They Are So Similar
Communism and Fascism: The Reason They Are So Similar. ... It favors actions over intellectual reason, so it’s a harder concept for an academic to dissect with the same scrutiny as Marxism'.
We have been shouting these few decades that our US GENIUSES are being taken from being DR GOOD to being DR BAD. The sequestering of GENIUS with goals of capturing INVENTION/PATENTS---has been the goal of OLD WORLD KINGS from DARK AGES.
EXTREME WEALTH EXTREME POVERTY-----OLD WORLD KINGS USE NEO-LIBERALISM AND MARXISM
'25. Prison Science
Sharashka was an informal name for a type of prison camp where prisoners were treated better…slightly. The people who were sent to these camps were prominent intellectuals forced to work on scientific and technological projects. Many of the Soviet Union’s notable scientists and engineers passed through these camps.
24. Fear of Siberia
The idea of establishing a scientific prison camp actually came from the repressed scientists themselves. While awaiting trial in 1937, many of them feared being sent to Siberia, so they put together a proposal outlining all of the military technology they could create if they were given the proper resources, effectively sowing their own fate'.
My case of NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG illegal surveillance video and PORN are tied to SUSPICIOUS INTELLECTUALS. STANFORD TOTAL PRISON MODEL as I call it is what I modern GULAG-----prisons where intellectuals are treated slightly better.
'30. Suspicious Communists
Stalin imprisoned anyone that he suspected of threatening his totalitarian regime, even if they were communists themselves'.
As we say over and again------all 99% of WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown, REAL 99% Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindi-Buddhist were thrown into these INTELLECTUAL GULAGS. No RACIST or ANTI-RELIGIOUS stance need apply.
28 All Creeds Subjected
There was no limitation to who could be persecuted by Stalin, and the Russian Orthodox Church, Greek Catholics, Latin Catholics, Muslims and Russia’s Jewish population were all targeted by the NKVD.
Not trying to brag---but I am an intellectual not a genius maybe. The difference between THOUGHT ACADEMICS and REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE LOCKEAN AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT I AM MAN ACADEMICS-----is that I work for the 99% WE THE PEOPLE and THOUGHT ACADEMICS work for global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH.
STALIN/HITLER/FRANCO/MUSSOLINI WORKED FOR GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS.
Intellectuals pretending that those MARXISTS were LEFTISTS----were lying.
'6. Population Control
Under Article 38, anyone who was simply accused of counter-revolution could be arrested and sent to the Gulags. This penal code was an effective way to lock up intellectuals. These activists, who were frequently non-violent, were put into camps with the most violent offenders. The Soviets purposely had the criminals terrorize the rest of the population as a way to prevent them from organizing'.
ROYAL SOCIETIES OF SCIENCE ARE CONTROLLED BY GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS-----ERGO, FAR-RIGHT FASCISM AS INTELLECTUALISM
STALIN/MAO/HITLER/FRANCO/MUSSOLINI were all controlled by OLD WORLD KINGS----ergo, far-right wing global banking 1%.
CULTURAL ARTS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONTROLLED BY GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS------CULTURAL INTELLECTUALS ARE CALLED 'LEFTISTS' WHILE BEING GLOBAL CORPORATE MARXIST.
When an US academic like DREZNER ---we are picking on him from our discussion of SOVEREIGN CITIZENS public policy------embrace global banking 1% neo-liberalism as the THOUGHT ACADEMICS this is who they are. These intellectuals like FASCISM and FAR-RIGHT TOTALITARIANISM because it sequesters all wealth to an extremely small group of people who then PATRONIZE those INTELLECTUALS----STEM/CULTURAL ARTS.
FOR MORE THAN FORTY YEARS---REAGAN/CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA-----REPRESSIVE AND ILLIBERAL SOCIETIES...AKA LAISSEZ FAIRE/MILITARY ECONOMIES
'For more than forty years Paul Hollander has chronicled Western intellectuals' lavish praise of the most repressive and illiberal societies'.
Global banking 1% uses FAKE ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT COMMUNISM AND FASCISM calling the best for PROGRESSIVE ACTION because it allows total capture of any civil society for any MOVING FORWARD OF CHANGE. This must be done without RELIGION because it is so brutal and evil while MOVING FORWARD--
About this website
Both Communism and Fascism are the two horns of the satan
Global banking 1% neo-liberal THOUGHT academics are not US academics---they are OLD WORLD KINGS academics. US academics are those REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE LIBERALS. YOU KNOW---those LEGAL US sovereign citizens. Those criminal US sovereign citizens are tied to global banking 1% and THOUGHT academics who do not recognize US SOVEREIGN RULE OF LAW.
Opiate of the Intellectuals
By: Harvey Klehr
January 10, 2018
For more than forty years Paul Hollander has chronicled Western intellectuals' lavish praise of the most repressive and illiberal societies. Born in Hungary, Hollander grew up under Nazi rule and attended college in a communist regime. He left after the failed 1956 revolution and completed his education in Great Britain and the United States, becoming a sociologist and teaching for many years at the University of Massachusetts.
Having personal experience with totalitarian governments inoculated Hollander from the sometimes casual, often mendacious, willingness of writers and artists to credit dictators and mass murderers with benign motives and excuse their brutality. His first major book, Political Pilgrims (1981), was a bracing reminder that men and women who prided themselves on their courage in speaking truth to power in their own countries were credulous fools and dupes when they visited such communist countries as the Soviet Union, China, and Cuba, ignoring mass murder, brutal persecution, and gross mismanagement of the economy.
Hollander’s latest book, From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship, extends his earlier analysis in two ways: by including intellectuals who were enamored of fascism and other authoritarian systems, and by focusing on their admiration of leaders rather than systems. He does, however, admit that fawning over the leader and admiring the system often go hand-in-hand, and frequently ignores the distinction.
For readers of his earlier books, Hollander’s analysis of intellectuals who swooned over Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Fidel Castro, and Che Guevera will be largely a recapitulation of “the apparently limitless capacity of idealistic human beings…to engage in wishful thinking and substantial political misjudgment.”
POLITICAL MISJUDGEMENT BECAUSE THESE GUYS ARE NOT LEFTIST------THEY ARE THE SAME AS RIGHT WING FASCISTS.
Whether from H.G. Wells, who discerned after an interview with Stalin that his rule was all the more remarkable “since no one is afraid of him and everybody trusts him,” or John K. Fairbank, who concluded in 1972―just after the Great Cultural Revolution that cost tens of millions of Chinese their lives―that “Americans may find in China’s collective life today an ingredient of personal moral concern for one’s neighbor that has a lesson for us all,” there is no shortage of noxious blather peddled by Western intellectuals.
Many of the people Hollander discusses can be called intellectuals only by stretching that term far beyond its common-sense meaning. At the beginning of the book, he defines intellectuals as “well-educated, idealistic people of a social-critical disposition and high expectations, preoccupied with moral, cultural, political and social issues, mainly employed (at the present time) by academic institutions in departments of humanities and social sciences.” But why then include extended discussions of people like Ambassador Joseph Davies, a lawyer and businessman who praised Stalin while he served as American Ambassador to the USSR, and wrote an apologia for the Purge Trials―Mission to Moscow―that was turned into one of the worst movies ever made? Or Walter Duranty, a cynical New York Times reporter who deliberately lied about the horrendous famines sweeping the USSR? Or Noel Field, an American diplomat and Soviet spy? Likewise, Ramsey Clark, who has written paeans to dictators ranging from Saddam Hussein to Slobodan Milosevic, has not a single notable intellectual accomplishment to his credit. Nor does the actor Sean Penn, whose effusions about Hugo Chavez and the Mexican drug lord, El Chapo, are more properly part of the story of Hollywood idiocy rather than intellectuals. All of these men deserve every brickbat thrown at them by Hollander for their mendacity, but to call them intellectuals is to stretch the meaning of the word beyond what it can bear.
Hollander’s discussion of intellectuals’ fascination with, and admiration for, fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler is more original. He notes that far fewer were attracted to fascism's doctrines than communism's, no doubt largely because the former's emphasis on a strident nationalism was less appealing than the latter's supposed universalism. And, obviously, fascism and Nazism had far less staying power and were discredited by their defeat in World War II and the subsequent horror and disgust the Holocaust occasioned.
MARXIST SUPPOSED UNIVERSALISM-----AKA UNITED NATIONS ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNMENT. That would be DREZNER----and the THOUGHT academics saying they are 'PUBLIC'.
That last point raises the disturbing question of why more intellectuals were not repelled by communism’s consequences. The death toll communist regimes racked up dwarfs those of Nazi Germany; Hitler's mass killings and concentration camps were preceded by Stalin's gulag and great purges, through which he engaged in ethnic cleansing and exterminated millions. The human cost of Mao’s purges and politically-induced starvation in the decades after World War II exceeded Stalin’s, and Pol Pot ordered the killing of a larger percentage of his country’s population than any other leader.
Whatever its flaws, Hollander's book is a powerful testament to a humanistic Western tradition that values individual freedom and political liberties and defends democratic society against its enemies.
WHAT? YOU MEAN REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE CAPITALIST LOCKEAN LIBERALISM?
It is a necessary reminder that intelligent, creative, and talented people are not immune from making dreadful and dangerous political choices and admiring vile and pernicious societies and leaders. Messy democracy may require compromise and trimming and policies that are less than pure and rational in order to accommodate the many voices that comprise society, but its alternative is far worse. Precisely because they live in the world of ideas, intellectuals are particularly prone to value consistency and admire the idealists’ attempts to force their vision on everyone else, damn the consequences.