That’s the question being asked by David Boaz over at TCS Daily.
He notes that there have, actually, been some anti-Communist movies, but not nearly as many as there have been anti-Nazi movies, and the Communists killed far more people than the Nazis, thus creating innumerable dramatic human situations that could be illuminated through film.
I’ve got two thoughts on why there haven’t been as many anti-Communist movies:
1) Hollywood tends to the left of the political spectrum. It’s cultural/political ethos is socialistic to begin with, and there is less of a desire on filmmakers’ parts to go after Communists than people (like Nazis) that they perceive to be on the opposite end of the political spectrum (though, in actuality, the Nazi party was the National Socialist party).
2) The Cold War never got hot. What made Naziism so riveting and enduring an evil in film is the fact that a whole generation of Americans went off to fight it. Communism was a looming menace, but since we and the Russians (or the Chinese) never squared off in an actual world war, that looming menace never turned into the generation-defining experience that World War II was. If Stalin massacred more civilians than Hitler did (let’s suppose; I haven’t checked the numbers), we never had to fight Stalin, and that kept him from becoming an archtypal villain equivalent to Hitler in cultural stature. (Though he has clearly been the first runner-up in that category.)
So those are my theories.
What’re yours?
Hitler murdered probably something in the order of 11,000,000. The butchery in Russia did not, as you seem to imply, begin with Stalin, but with Lenin, and it lasted till the collapse of the Soviet Union. A respectable Oxford historian once quoted to me a figure of 62,500,000 dead by murder for the whole arc of Soviet history. Another authority argues that Soviet census figures show a consistent lack of about 5% of males in Russia over the Soviet decades as compared with what would be expected. And the mass murder in China, over a smaller period, was probably larger, though it cannot be estimated, since Chinese figures, unlike Russian ones, are unreliable. You then have to factor in the butchery in Kampuchea (two million dead), Vietnam (another two million), eastern Europe, Ethiopia, and so on, and the carnage from failed Communist insurgencies such as Sendero Luminoso in Peru and Greece in 1948. I would not, myself, be surprised if it was found that Communism had been directly responsible for the deaths by violence or by planned starvation of at least 300,000,000 people.
The Nazis had uniforms, accents, and attitudes that virtually screamed “EVIL!!!” The Communists tended to have third-rate uniforms and such, plus very foreign accents (the Nazis stereotypically were often well-educated and could speak evil-sounding English). It’s like picking villians between Darth Vader and the hippies at the vegan grocery store, aesthetically speaking.
Seriously, the Nazis had things like lightning bolts and skulls on their uniforms. The Commies had red stars and farm implements. The Nazis had things like Bf 109s and U-Boats while the Commies had AK-47s and buried missiles. Goosestepping vs. missile trucks on parade in Red Square. The Commies just crazy more than scary.
It’s like picking villians between Darth Vader and the hippies at the vegan grocery store, aesthetically speaking.
Dude, have you been to Whole Foods? Some of those petitioner-hippies are waaay scarier than Hayden Christianson.
Seriously, though, I’m going with the idea that most of Hollywood’s aristocracy actually identify with Marxist ideas, at least in theory. In practice, it is quite another story as they guard their feeding grounds more jealously than the worst of the capitalist pigs they claim to hate.
Wasn’t there a movie about Che Guevara recently?
Doubtless there were many motives. I think that a more likely motive was a reaction against the McCarthy era anti-Communist hysteria and persecution of alleged leftists in the movies, where ‘Liberal’, ‘Socialist’ and ‘Communist’ were conflated.
Some would say that much of the 1950s SF genre in the US expressed Cold War anti-communist fears.
The US was in a cinematographically exiciting war with Germany and Japan while allied with the Soviet Union. Despite this alliance, most US war films present the US (with a little British help) as defeating Nazi Germany almost single-handed, with no mention of the great sacrifices of the Russian people. Most Americans are probably unaware that Stalingrad is regarded as the turning point of the war. Anti-communist bias in not acknowledging the Soviet Union?
Atheists have been responsible for more carnage during the 20th century than all the ‘religious’ wars combined.
Even though Stalin may have killed more civilians than Hitler, there is a a major difference between Communism and Nazism. Communism is altruistic but a godless development of Judeo-Christian values (cf Acts 4:32); hatred of things we can’t choose (like race or disability) is not part of communism. Most Communists would denounce Stalin and Mao’s mass murders as ‘not properly Communist’, as we would denounce the Crusades and Inquisition as ‘not properly Christian’. Today’s neo-Nazis would NOT denounce Hitler’s murders.
Nazism is not altruistic. Insofar as it has any philosophical basis it a Nietzschean ‘Will to Power’ and triumph of the strongest, not a Will to Love or defence of the weakest. The Final Solution was based on hatred of something an individual could not choose.
‘Abortion rights’ fit more easily with a right-wing Libertarian ‘laisse fair’ or eugenic survival of the strongest/fittest attitude than with a liberal or leftist altruistic attitude of supporting the weakest.
I wouldn’t denounce the Crusades or the Inquisition(s). Some (very few, comparably) within the movements lost sight of the goals of these, but, all-in-all, I see no major flaw in their design nor their stated ends. Not so with Communism or Nazism. These were flawed from their conception and have never once worked in the ways in which they were intended.
Also, Uncle Joe, I wonder what ever gave you the idea that the Hollywood Left actually believes in standing up for the “little guy.” Having worked in the Hollywood system (first as a non-union extra making $54/day, then as a seldom-working SAG extra, and finally as principle actor and stuntman) I can tell you from experience that the vast majority of the Hollywood Left do not actually practice the “compassion” they preach.
They’ll promote voting for John Kerry–by NAME–on the set one moment (with the idea that he’ll provide more equity among the “working classes” along with evironmental protection) and the next moment the very same individuals will deny you a $5 “smoke bump” for working on a set with more air pollution than a modern-day coal mine.
There is a huge gulf in the Hollywood film and tv industry, and I’ve seen up close how this compassion extends only to those whom many in the industry see as “equals.” The difference in how one is treated when one is an extra and how the very same individual is treated when he is on a principle contract is glaring. I’ve had more than one experience wherein the same individual was abusive one day (when I was an extra or someone looking for work “hustling” a set) and deferential as can be a few months later when I was a principle.
Hollywood’s liberalism is rooted more in hedonism than anything else. The attitude is that one should be allowed to engage in whatever kind of debauchery one wishes and that no one else can be allowed to “judge.” The world is turned on its head here. One man’s vile deeds are allowed–are indeed commendable in the opinion of many–whereas another man’s thoughts or words (no matter how carefully thought-out or soft-spoken) are the worst sort of crime.
All this having been said, I feel the need to balance the scales by stating that there are good people in this industry. Some of them even think of themselves as liberals. But they are few and far between.
I just watched a pre-recorded documentary on Fatima the other evening, filmed when Sister Lucia was still alive and the narrator, Ricardo Montalban, still had some dark hair. The message of Fatima, to pray the rosary for the conversion of Russia, is still needed today but has, in my opinion, been eclipsed by the ongoing events of Medjugorje. The evils of communism have extended way beyond the borders of Russia and socialism, and as explained by Jared have become popular in the halls of Hollywood and the liberal agenda. Socialism, as explained by Alice von Hildebrand, is not the system of fairness touted by those who adhere to its principals, but rather a mask to eliminate all belief in God and to promote atheism.
Our Lady of Fatima/Our Lady of the Rosary . . . pray for us.
Two stories of diverse but powerful import come to mind.
A.The Cardinal Mindzsenty story:This saintly Prince of the Church from Hungary was imprisoned and tortured,ruthlessly by the communists for his faith in Christ and his position as an heroic leader in the Catholic Church.
He then was freed for a couple of days in 1956,only to be forced into exile in the US embassy in Budapest for 15 years.He wasn’t even secreted away to attend the second Vatican Council.I wonder why.
He was promised,by His Holiness Pope Paul VI to hold the primacy of Hungary until he died.
And then in 1971 when he came out of exile he was stripped of the tile of Cardinal Primate of Hungary and forced into exile by the same Pope.
He was silenced by the Vatican for being so staunchly anti-communist.Since the Vattican II documents contain no direct condemnation of communism anywhere in its 19 documents,the Vatican did not want Cardinal Mindszenty to make waves and condemn these horrendous and most evil of butchers.He was replaced instead by a cardinal who was soft of communism.
At Cardinal Mindzsenty’s funeral in 1975 not a single representative from the Vatican was present.There where two subpar films made pertaining to the Cardinal,”The Prisoner with Alec Guiness,which fictionalized almost everything about this holy prelate,and “Guilty of Treason”starring Charles Bickford,which is a little more accurate,but still a letdown.
Someday Cardinal Mindzsenty will be canonized and maybe Mel Gibson could depict his glorious life.I wouldnt trust Commywood for anything.
B.”One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch”.I do not know if this has been made into a film yet,but Solzhynitsm,s description of a single day of starvation in a Soviet gulag is terrifying.
God bless you.
Thank you JA for reminding people that Nazis were arch-leftists, socialists of the rankest sort. Why is that so hard for people to remember?
“The Lives of Others” is out in art theaters now…
“The Lives of Others’ is playing in the art theaters presently…
I also think a lot of the Cold War sci-fi films were the result of sublimated anti-commie fears. Invasion of the Body Snatchers comes to mind. Then there was just the general fear of nuclear war… remember how all the monsters were the result of “radiation” that mutated them into rampaging giants? “Behold, I am become Death – the destroyer of worlds”.
Another point: Russia was our ally in WWII. You’ll find a couple of wretched propaganda movies about our “democratic” ally filmed during that time. I’d guess that the alliance during WWII deflected a lot of critics and probably produced some of the admiration for the Soviets. They fought on the bloodiest front of the war, after all.
Weren’t some of the big Hollywood movers and shakers back then Jewish as well? They might have had more reason to think any enemy of Hitler was a friend of theirs.
Jimmy:
My theories:
1) The intelligensia were and remain fellow travellers who whitewashed, apologized and defended whatever atrocities the communists committed
2) Hollywood was infiltrated by communists an aided and abetted by (1) so it was impossible to make
3) Communism was just as murderous as naziism but never ‘targeted’ a specific group, it improvised its enemies
4) communism eventually degenerated and it’s kinda hard to make a scary movie when by the80s the idology became buffonish
5) anti-communist movies will be made outside of Hollywood; there’s one made in Germany of a stasi agent who spies on an artistic couple (can’t remember the name)
xavier
“5) anti-communist movies will be made outside of Hollywood; there’s one made in Germany of a stasi agent who spies on an artistic couple (can’t remember the name)” writes xavier
“The Lives of Others” as noted by Alyssa above.
I’ve got two thoughts on why there haven’t been as many anti-Communist movies:
1) Hollywood tends to the left of the political spectrum.
Weren’t most folks in Hollywood in McCarthy’s list during the Red Scare?
For some reason the left will ignore socialist/communist totalitarianism. Look how cushy Hollywood is with Castro with many prominent Hollywood types meeting with him. Just think how much they idolize a killer like Che.
There there is Chavez who is actually doing the things they say Bush is doing in our country by consolidating control.
It comes down to if you are sympathetic to some ideology you are more likely to ignore the bad stuff.
Interesting question. My answer: the Hollywood elite don’t want to embarrass their comrades.
An interesting take on Sen. Joseph McCarthy can be found in “Treason” by Ann Coulter. I highly recommend it.
Most multi-national corporations don’t have lightning bolts and skulls on their logos either, yet Hollywood pretty darned often features evil multi-national corporations in their movies. So I suspect it’s mostly ideology and philosophy that accounts for the disparity.
To show commies as evil would be to imply that Reagan, who strongly opposed the evil, was good. Hollywood, Reagan, good? Those words can’t go together in the typical movie-making mind.
(cont’d) Whereas FDR, who was president when the Nazis were defeated, was a Democrat. No problem implying that he was good.
“Weren’t some of the big Hollywood movers and shakers back then Jewish as well?”
I got news for you Kevin: they STILL are mostly Jewish. Like someone said above, there’s an aristocricy in H-wood. stuff gets inherited. power gets inherited too. Not that i’m anti-semitic or anything. but the jewish people in H-wood have strong reason to hate nazies more than commies.
John Wayne made some anti-Communist films (“Big Jim McClain”, “Blood Alley”, and “The Green Berets”), but I can’t think of anyone else in Hollywood who did.
John Wayne made some anti-Communist films (“Big Jim McClain”, “Blood Alley”, and “The Green Berets”), but I can’t think of anyone else in Hollywood who did.
bill912,
I wonder what you think about Gary Cooper’s “High Noon”.
I didn’t care for it, Esau. While there are times when civilians should get involved in fighting crime, a situation like the one depicted in “High Noon” calls for trained professionals. I prefer John Wayne and Howard Hawks’ answer to “High Noon”: “Rio Bravo”.
What’s weird is that Gary Cooper, in fact, supported the House Un-American Activities Committee by testifying about the Red Menace in Hollywood; in addition, not only was he a friendly witness for the House, but also an officer for the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals.
Uncle Joe Stalin had some 100 million Urkrainian farmers killed. That beats Hitler’s paltry 6 million (paltry -only- in comparison)
The leftists were very effective in propagandizing the West into thinking that the National Socialist German Worker’s Party was a right-wing aristocratic party. Their argument with fascism was that of siblings – like the way they treated the Trotskyites. Fascism is post-modern, whereas Communism is Modern, that is the chief difference. The former ideology is still very strong today, especially among those who used to support the communist international. When the wall fell, they shifted to post-modernism. Group-will-to-power is the ideology of that party that wants to prevent the minority party from having floor time, by changing House rules that haven’t been altered since the year of our Lord, 1822.
The left of today are not the idealistic people of the 1920s. They are hardened, cynical promoters of the old Caesar cult.
As to movies, there was Red Dawn.
The interactions between the Federation and the Klingons in TOS was something of a reflection. At least one episode, with the parallel Earth and the victorious Red Guards was very much in the open.
The interactions between the Federation and the Klingons in TOS was something of a reflection. At least one episode, with the parallel Earth and the victorious Red Guards was very much in the open.
Actually, if anybody remembers the ill-fated series Enterprise, wasn’t there a two-part episode where the Nazis became such a powerful force (due to alien intervention, of course) that, in fact, invaded America on its soil?
Puzzled, thanks for reminding of us of that Star Trek episone(“The Omega Glory”). “Freedom? Freedom? That is a worship word, Yang worship.” One of my favorite words. “It must apply to everyone, or it applies to no one.”
And, ultimately, the Red Guards lost. “That which is ours, is ours again.”
I can think of a number of cold-war movies with communism as the subject. Hunt for the Red October, Crimson Tide, Top Gun, K-19 the widowmaker, platoon, full metal jacket, apocalypse now, and countless others. although these movies may not have been as “glamorous” per se as the mini-series “Band of Brothers” which portrayed the reality and horrors of war, but in a sense the nobility and honor in going to fight a “real evil” in the Nazis. THe movies made about vietnam, the soviet union, etc seem to take on an attitude of relativism, where the US might have been just as wrong as the ‘bad’guys’
The best line came from Kirk when he told Spock in that alternate universe:
“What will it be?
Past or future? Tyranny or freedom?
It’s up to you.
It is time.
In every revolution,
there’s one man with a vision.”
The Jewish influence in commumism and the US media is the real reason although many will condemn my statement as anti semetic.
I just remembered another one: “Strategic Air Command”, starring Brigidier General James Stewart, USAF, who earned the Distinguished Flying Cross in WWII. “Every day is a war in SAC”, said the guy playing General Hawks (read: General Curtis Lemay). As an old SAC flyer, I’m embarassed I didn’t think of that movie earlier.
Wouldn’t the Sean Connery’s James Bond films count?
“…although many will condemn my statement as anti semetic”
And they would be right.
I wonder what else Vlad can share with us from “Mein Kampf”?
They’re starting to come to me: “We Were Soldiers”.
One of the worst was “Jet Pilot”, starring John Wayne and Janet Leigh. The only things worth watching in that bomb are the F-86 flying scenes, done by USAF legend, General Chuck Yeager, double ace in WWII, and the first man to fly faster than sound.
done by USAF legend, General Chuck Yeager, double ace in WWII, and the first man to fly faster than sound.
Uhh… bill912, I think after the recent passing away of Mercury astronaut, Wally Schirra, and how folks recall the movie Right Stuff (as well as things hopefully learned at school), Yeager being the first man to fly faster than sound would should be common fact; at least, I hope.
“Enemy at the Gates”
About a Soviet sniper being hunted by a Nazi sniper.
It left me cold, as both would have killed my Catholic @#$!
Kind of like Alien VS Predator (which I refuse to watch.) Ultimately, I could care less about who wins in either movie.
(I did watch “Enemy at the Gates.” The Soviet was the good guy in the movie.)
Many people do not know that the term “Nazi” means “National Socialist German Workers’ Party” and that members of the horrid group did not call themselves Nazis, but called themselves socialists. They also did not use the F-word as a self-description.
Even the swastika itself was used to represent S-lettering for “socialism” under the National Socialist German Workers Party.
Swastika pictures http://rexcurry.net/swastika3clear.jpg and Pledge of Allegiance pictures
http://rexcurry.net/pledge-allegiance-pledge-allegiance.jpg expose shocking secrets about connections to American history.
The “Nazi salute” is more accurately called the “American salute” as it was created and popularized by national socialists in the USA where its use was mandated by law in government schools for three decades before, and through, the creation of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. It was the early gesture of the Pledge of Allegiance. http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html
The original pledge was anti libertarian and began with a military salute that then stretched out toward the flag. In actual use, the second part of the gesture was performed with a straight arm and palm down by children casually performing the forced ritual chanting. Due to the way that both gestures were used sequentially in the pledge, the military salute led to the Nazi salute. The Nazi salute is an extended military salute via the USA’s Pledge Of Allegiance. http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-swastika.html
The Pledge’s early salute caused quite a Fuhrer/furor. The dogma behind the Pledge was the same dogma that led to the socialist Wholecaust (of which the Holocaust was a part): 62 million slaughtered under the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; 49 million under the Peoples’ Republic of China; 21 million under the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. It was the worst slaughter of humanity ever.
There were beatings and lynchings against people who refused the straight-arm salute in robotic chanting of the Pledge in government schools in the USA.
The USA originated Nazism, Nazi salutes, flag fetishism, robotic group-chanting to flags, and the modern swastika symbol as S symbolism for “socialism,” all shown in the research of the symbologist Dr. Rex Curry.
Although the swastika was an ancient symbol, its use was altered to alphabetic symbolism in modern times. The bizarre acts in the USA began as early as 1875 and continued through the creation of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (German Nazis or NSGWP).
http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-swastika.html
American socialists (e.g. Edward Bellamy and Francis Bellamy teamed with the Theosophical Society and Freemasons) bear some blame for the notorious swastika http://rexcurry.net/swastika3clear.jpg Swastikas became overlapping S-letters for “socialism,” all shown in the research of the noted symbologist. The same symbol was used by the Theosophical Society during the time when the Bellamys, Freemasons and the Theosophical Society worked together. They also originated and helped to spread the stiff arm salute via the Pledge of Allegiance at their meetings.
As German socialism’s notorious flag symbol, the swastika was deliberately turned 45 degrees to the horizontal and always oriented in the S-direction. Similar alphabetic symbolism is still visible as Volkswagen logos. http://rexcurry.net/swastika-audi-logo.JPG
The USA is still the worst example in the world of bizarre laws that require collective robotic chanting to a national flag in government schools (socialist schools) every day for 12 years. It has changed generations of Americans from libertarians to authoritarians. The government bamboozled individuals into believing that collective robotic chanting in government schools is a beautiful expression of freedom. Frightening photographs are at http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html
Great, from an Anti-semetic to an anti-American.
What next?
The USA is still the worst example in the world of bizarre laws that require collective robotic chanting to a national flag in government schools (socialist schools) every day for 12 years.
Thanks to the ACLU, children no longer are required to be such robots.
Re: Tinny Ray: “I wonder how many others like him are out there?” (Robert Stack, “1941”).
He’s “Walkin’ on the Fightin’ Side of Me”.–Merle Haggard
Why does Hollywood concentrate upon the evils of Hitlerian Fascism and forget the evils of Communism?
Well, quite frankly, every orthodoxy abhors a heretic. From the hid battlements of eternity down to martinis at the corner bar, those who challenge existing doctrine are loathed by those who defend it. Likewise, the heterodox hold their opponents in contempt for failing to accept their new and superior doctrine. This too is the essence of the Communist/Fascist dynamic.
“…all shown in the research of the symbologist Dr. Rex Curry. ”
Yeah, I noticed. Tell me, where does one go for an advanced degree in “symbology”?
I wonder if ANY of that drek is EVEN A LITTLE true… like, you know, corroborated by someone besides this crackpot Curry.
Symbology is a degree attainable from Dan Brown University.
http://www.hccfl.edu/facultyinfo/ercurry/
I think given the anti-communist bend of the fascists, it’s more than a little disingenous to say that the Nazis were communists by another name. It’s a more than common phenomenon to associate Nazism with whatever one opposes, and here it’s seeming to do that with liberal Godless athiesm. I think if we were more honest, we would see it as being a part of right-wing Godless athiesm, which I think goes to show that Godless athiesm is the main culprit here, despite what economic system one prefers.
The main problem with the idea of socialism is that it has never lived up to the ideal in a large group due to people’s desires to be better than others. Sin is the reason that it can probably not work for large groups. A shame, because honestly, it’s a lot better idea than capitalism, which uses ones sinful greed to hopefully bring some sort of profit. After all, in the book of Acts, we see Christ’s early followers caring more about each other than worldly goods.
“All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their property and possessions and divide them among all according to each one’s need.”
If only we could get back to that spirit of Christian love instead of these poor shadows we are using to substitute, such as Communism, Capitalism, Fascism, etc… Of course, in Heaven this will all be inconsequential, but it sure would be nice to have things a little more God’s ways down here as well.
This is a little more on topic though…
Nazi bad guys: Indiana Jones
Commie bad guys: Red Dawn
Need I say more? 🙂
So, this from the website of the community college where he works;
“Rex Curry is an attorney and is in private practice specializing in criminal law. Professor Curry received an A.A. degree from Hillsborough Community College, a B.A. in Mass Communications from USF, and a J.D. degree from Florida State University with honors. At FSU he was a member of the Florida State University Law Review and, while at USF, he worked as a paid staff writer and columnist for the Oracle Newspaper. He is a member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and serves on the Board of Directors of the Hillsborough County Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. He is a former Law Clerk for United States Judge Everett P. Anderson and served as an Assistant Public Defender and as a Certified Legal Intern with Florida Rural Legal Services. Dr. Curry is a sixth-generation Floridian whose predecessors settled Key West”
What, no intensive post-graduate work in Symbology? No Symbology scholarships? Did he ever defend his Symbology thesis? Perhaps he has had papers accepted in peer-reviewed Symbology journals?
I think I’ll write a book on symbology. I mean, I have degrees in art… that’s symbols, right? Look at me, I’m an expert!
I have degrees in art… that’s symbols, right?
A degree is symbolic, but it doesn’t mean your art qualifies you.
These guys were Malthusiastic?
Prof. / Dr. Rex Curry’s renown as a symbologist ranks alongside world-renowned Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon, according to Google (the foremost judge of symbology today).
Note that not only did Stalin kill more than Hitler, Mao killed more than Hitler, too.
Communism is altruistic but a godless development of Judeo-Christian values (cf Acts 4:32); hatred of things we can’t choose (like race or disability) is not part of communism.
Hatred of class enemies, as such, is indeed an intrinsic part of Communism.
And it’s far from dead. American academia has large chunks of it.
Hatred of class enemies, as such, is indeed an intrinsic part of Communism.
Who’s communism is that? Mary Kay’s?
Ignore troll; Mary got his goat.
Maybe someone got yours too.
Pipe and Tom: You have read the Communist tracts, yes? If so, you know that Communism is built upon fomenting hatred between the “proletariat,” the “bourgeoisie” and the aristocracy.
We didn’t liberate Communist concentration camps. Many people have not seen the footage of the Ukraine being starved to death – the bread basket of Europe.
But let me offer this thought. One was a terrifying entity we defeated and we have a historical memory of as a terror. The Nazis had about 12 good years of being VERY bad. The Soviets had 70, we got used to them, we didn’t fight them, and they sputtered and died.
Our last collective memory of Nazi Germany is from Movie Tone Newsreels – a bombed out Berlin with SS soldiers (who were ironicaly from foreign units!!!) fighting to the door of the Führerbunker.
Our last collective memory of Soviet Russia – and all of us over 30 saw this LIVE on the news – is the lowering of the Soviet Flag over the Cremlin and the raising of the Russian Republic’s standard. (Of course preceeded by German civilians pushing down a wall like they were having a frat party!) The Evil Old Man at the end of the block that we lived around for years died in his sleep with a whimper.
Wladimir Felzmann, an ex-opus dei member tells about a talk with Escriva: after he (Escriva) insisted that with Hitler’s help the Franco government has saved Christianity from the communism he added: “Hitler against the Jews, Hitler against the Slavs, this means Hitler against communism”
Groebbels was Catholic, as was von Rommel–this does not necessarily mean anything BUT neither does this very tenous link between Nazism and the (very bad) Islamic Brotherhood, and the PLO and the Baath Party
–what about the Maronite Catholic Kaateb Party of Pierre Gemayel modeled after the 1938 Munich Olympics Nazi party–a more direct link and facism
also Fransisco Franco’s pro-Catholic party
There has been a strong Fasisct and Catholic link (although not necessarily per se or theologically)
The same reasoning is applied by secularists against Catholics.
“If Jews persist in supporting communism directly or indirectly, that will be regrettable. By their failure to use the press, the radio and the banking house, where they stand so prominently, to fight communism as vigorously as they fight Naziism, the Jews invite the charge of being supporters of communism.”
— November 28, 1938
Father Charles Coughlin
May St. Terese of Lisieux, the Little Flower, intercede for you
If so, you know that Communism is built upon fomenting hatred between the “proletariat,” the “bourgeoisie” and the aristocracy.
Like hating sin is not hating the sinner, hatred of class is not the same as hating people.
Curse of the Golden Flower is a film that can only be understood as a diatribe against the current communist regime in China.
The film is rife with images of tortured motherhood and the utter societal dissolution such violence against women causes. And I think Zhang Yimo got sick and tired of people reading pro-regime messages into his movies. What could be more anti-Communist than thousands of golden warriors fighting for motherhood being mercilessly plowed under by, literally, an iron curtain?
The poisoned “medicine” the mother is forced to take throughout the film is an echo of the forced abortions that are an integral part of vile Communistic social engineering. Both have the effect of driving women mad. In fact, it was personal understanding of the effects of abortion that made me realize that the film is a valiant counter offensive on the behalf of the mothers of China.
The very last scene brings home the message with a powerful poignancy: any claim to “civilization” in a society that disparages the feminine image is an abhorrent abomination and a lie.
Death to Communism!
For anyone interested – I feel this is related – this is a decent website discussing some of the martyrs of the 20th centurty:
http://www.holycross.edu/departments/history/vlapomar/persecut/homepage1.htm
My only complaint about the work is it roundly ignores the African martyrs of the 20th century as well as the Armenian Holocaust which took the lives of over a million Armenians – mostly Orthodox, but many Catholic as well.
Pipe: Yeah, ’cause hating, imprisoning or killing a man due to the fact that he’s lower, middle, or upper class is TOTALLY different than hating, imprisoning, or killing a man due to the fact that he’s Jewish.
Any way you slice him, he still ends up just as dead.
Marx defined class in a specialised way to do with how much control an individual or group has over the means of economic production, more than preferences for eg opera or wine. Marx saw an inevitable confict between those who control the means of production (bourgeoisie) and those who actually produce the goods and services (proletariat). Some of the self-proclaimed ‘Hollywood Liberals’ described above are in Marx’s terms ‘Hollywood Bourgeoise’ exploiting the ‘Hollywood Proletariat’.
On Marx’s definition one can choose to relinquish one’s power, as John Lewis, Tony Benn and notably St Francis did. So in the Marxist model, if the bourgeoisie relinquished their power to that of everyone else there would be no need for conflict.
No so with the Nazis where unchoosable factors like race and disability could lead to death. Even those who renounced their religious Judaism, were not spared persecution.
Not that this is any consolation to the unjustly persecuted.
So in the Marxist model, if the bourgeoisie relinquished their power to that of everyone else there would be no need for conflict.
This is horribly niave. The Marxist model has been a proven failure every time it’s been truly tried. The USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, and on and on. Everywhere it’s been tried, it’s led to nothing but totalitarianism and failure. Hell, even in the Star Trek universe, they eventually brought back the idea of currency :). There is no point in pushing Communism. It’s a failure. And it fails because it fails to understand the human spirit and the mind of Man.
Move on.
Uncle Joe wrote, “. . . in the Marxist model, if the bourgeoisie relinquished their power to that of everyone else there would be no need for conflict.”
Isn’t that reassuring to know?
And similarly, if the West would simply stop resisting Al-Qaeda, and isntead surrender its weapons to Osama, require all to renounce Christ and convert to their brand of Islam, then there would be no further need of conflict as far as Al-Qaeda is concerned.
They would have no beef with us.
For us would be them. We would be assimilated.
See how that works?
We are just bringing all this misery on ourselves.
You know, by insisting on Christ and freedom and all.
Back to Jimmy’s post:
You had two theories 1) the leftism of Hollywood covers up the ills of the communists 2) the cold war was never “hot” enough to be dramatic.
I favor the first theory.
In my view no recent event in history was more visually dramatic anmd naturally cinematic than unarmed college students standing in front of tanks in Tiananmen Square. Yet there is no movie.
I would add one other wrinkle. I think Hollywood is also cowardly and that their cowardice prevents them from addressing the real enemy of today: Islamic extremism.
“Wladimir Felzmann, an ex-opus dei member tells about a talk with Escriva: after he (Escriva) insisted that with Hitler’s help the Franco government has saved Christianity from the communism he added: “Hitler against the Jews, Hitler against the Slavs, this means Hitler against communism”
Groebbels was Catholic, as was von Rommel–this does not necessarily mean anything BUT neither does this very tenous link between Nazism and the (very bad) Islamic Brotherhood, and the PLO and the Baath Party
–what about the Maronite Catholic Kaateb Party of Pierre Gemayel modeled after the 1938 Munich Olympics Nazi party–a more direct link and facism
also Fransisco Franco’s pro-Catholic party
There has been a strong Fasisct and Catholic link (although not necessarily per se or theologically)
The same reasoning is applied by secularists against Catholics.”
I am left scratching my head on this one.
What is your thesis here?
Referring to Stalin as “Uncle Joe” makes me sick. He was not our buddy. He was evil.
Thesis? What thesis?
It’s just a bunch of unrelated trivia presented in such a way as to imply significance that is not there. There simply is no connection that can be credibly made between Goebbels’ (at least I know how to spell it) supposed Catholicism and, well, anything. Goebbels was as much a devout Catholic as I am a devout Gozer worshipper.
“this does not necessarily mean anything, BUT neither does this very tenous link between Nazism and the (very bad) Islamic Brotherhood, and the PLO and the Baath Party”
Yes, it does mean something. That is the whole point (though you are really on the wrong thread, here). Some people may not want to hear it, but the movers and shakers of the early Islamofascist Anti-Jew / anti-Israel movement were card-carrying Nazi ideologues.
Sorry for any offense, I am called Joseph, I am an uncle and I like to be avuncular. Joe Ratzinger seems to be a far more agreeable uncle than Joe Stalin or Joe McCarthy.
My point was to distinguish between the motivations of the Nazis and Communists, not to excuse the crimes of either.
Whether the bourgeoisie should relinquish some of their privileges is a question. If and how they should be forced is another question.
It is wrong to murder the bourgeoisie, it is wrong to murder by armed robbery, it is wrong to murder someone because of their race. In these three cases the consequences may be the same but the motivation of the killers (egalitarianism, greed, hate) would differ as would the pragmatic possibility of escape by handing over the power or money in the first two cases, but the inability to change one’s race in the last.
Nazism and Communism are not simple moral equivalences as far as their motives are concerned.
To get back to Jimmy’s question, I think that many non-explicit anti-communist movies have come out of Hollywood.
F’rinstance?
Tim J,
You worship Gozer?
“I am the keymaster!”
Oh, and does “Dr. Strangelove” count as anti-communist?
Okay, it was anti-Superpower all around, but there was a lot of anti-communist rhetoric;
Gen. Jack D. Ripper: “I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.”
And of course;
Major T. J. “King” Kong: “Well, boys, I reckon this is it – nuclear combat toe to toe with the Rooskies!”.
“…At this height – why, they might harpoon us, but they dang sure ain’t gonna spot us on no radar screen!”.
“It is wrong to murder the bourgeoisie, it is wrong to murder by armed robbery, it is wrong to murder someone because of their race. In these three cases the consequences may be the same but the motivation of the killers (egalitarianism, greed, hate) would differ as would the pragmatic possibility of escape by handing over the power or money in the first two cases, but the inability to change one’s race in the last.”
It is an act of evil to kill unjustly, period. Whether in my evil I propose to my intended victim that he may evade the death I plan to deal him, by submitting himself by my tyranny, or whether in my evil I make no provision for his escape, I am still a tyrant and an evildoer.
To demand that someone act in a certain way or threaten to kill him is not better than to simply to kill him. For in demanding that someone act in a certain way or die, I have violated the dignity of his freedom.
Nazism and armed Communism are equivalent evils.
Purely voluntary Communism would be a different story. You want to join our Communist arrangement, stay as long as you like, and walk away when you wish; I have no problem with such an arrangement. Who would? Like the early Christians, the Walden crowd, and the hippie communes: Non-violent communal ownership and egalitarianism – great. Peace, love and understanding.
But major Communist movements always bring in the barbed wire and the automatic weapons. People are not free to leave. People are not free to do anything – but submit.
Meanwhile the party higher-ups enjoy sea-side villas, fine wines, and the best of everything. While everyone else starves.
That’s not egalitarianism; it’s tyranny masqerading as egalitarianism, but tyranny, just the same.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. Only worse.
Ah, “Dr. Strangelove”! I knew a B-52 pilot who was just like the Slim Pickens character in that movie. He was flying with us one day and my co-pilot asked him if he had ever seen “Dr. Strangelove”. He said: “Yeah, and I don’t own a cowboy hat!”
Jarner,
The problems with communism, in addition to its atheism, its historicism, its economic determinism, its denial of the reality of fallen human nature, is that it is also a violation of the commandments “thou shalt not steal” and “thou shalt not covet”
The original American idea, and now also that of the Catholic Church in Rerum Novarum and its follow-ons, and most promoted by G. K. Chesterton, is microcapitalism, or distributism.In this system, the workers -own- the means of production.
The fact is, the National Socialists -were- socialists. Really. No kidding. They also were post-modernists, believing that there is no transcendent objective, signified – ie no Bible or anything like it, that God cannot have spoken. That objective morality and individual moral responsibility is a bourgeois notion and harmful, and thus rejected, and that therefore the sumum bonum is the group will to power. Group identity, group will to power ideas are by no means rare these days in America.
Goebbels was a neo-pagan, and Rommel was not a Nazi.
it is also a violation of the commandments “thou shalt not steal” and “thou shalt not covet”
Not necessarily. It’s possible for communists to work towards a classless, stateless social organization based on common ownership of the means of production without either coveting or stealing.
For in demanding that someone act in a certain way or die, I have violated the dignity of his freedom.
And Catholics vote to limit the freedom of people at every election, demanding that the laws conform to Church principles.
“For in demanding that someone act in a certain way or die, I have violated the dignity of his freedom.”
And Catholics vote to limit the freedom of people at every election, demanding that the laws conform to Church principles.
Actually, Maria, Catholics vote to prevent others from violating unborn babies’ dignity of freedom. Our “free” society demands that babies in the womb stop being an unwanted nuisance or die. In addition to this, you propose to limit Catholics’ freedom to vote according to their conscience. Ah, the tyranny of relativism.
Once again…
True freedom is to be able to choose the good NOT “do what ever feels right!”
Actually, Brian, Catholics vote on much wider array of issues than just abortion. And Brian, you bear false witness in saying I “propose to limit Catholics’ freedom to vote according to their conscience.”
I apologize for misinterpreting your comments, Maria. On which issues do Catholics seek limit others’ freedom?
On every issue that one votes, someone’s freedom is in question.
Yes, laws are made to limit freedoms. That’s what they do.
There are three obstacles to people doing whatever they want;
1) Physical & mental limitations
2) Limitations of personal conscience
3) Societal Limitations (Law & cultural pressures)
In a world where wealth and technology have overcome so many of the natural physical limitations to evil, and where consciences, so far from being well-formed, are numbed and stunted by cheap luxury and excesses of every kind, Societal Pressure – the force of law – becomes more and more necessary to keep people’s warped and selfish appetites in check.
Like Chesterton said, “When you break the big laws, you do not get freedom; you do not even get anarchy. You get the small laws.”
The biggest lie of the last few decades is “you can’t legislate morality”… you can’t legislate anything BUT morality. Law is morality codified.
Now, you can’t, by legislation, make people live moral lives. But the idea is to make immorality very inconvenient.
On every issue that one votes, someone’s freedom is in question.
Ok, umm… you’ve out-foxed me. Have you got a solution to this problem? In the way you describe it, it doesn’t appear to be specific to Catholics but a problem inherent in democracy.
As long as this topic is starting to drift a little… a thought popped into my head. The world is getting smaller, if in a few decades it’s very easy for people to relocate would it be worthwhile to setup a Catholic Theocracy somewhere. People who want to live there could move there, and those that don’t could move away. Or have the past and current failures of theocracies proven that they just won’t work until Jesus returns. I have virtually no knowledge in this area, I’m just wondering what people think.
The world is getting smaller…
That’s one of the consequences of globalization.
Or have the past and current failures of theocracies proven that they just won’t work until Jesus returns.
I believe Weigel’s thought here on a certain Ratzingerian notion sheds some light on this very topic:
“If, amidst some familiar Ratzingerian themes, there is a new chord struck with particular force, it is Benedict XVI’s insistence, repeated several times, that a Christian Church faithful to its Lord cannot be a Church of power. Benedict does not quite describe Christianity’s alliance with state power as a Babylonian captivity. Still, he comes very close when he writes that “the temptation to use power to secure the faith has arisen again and again in various forms throughout the centuries, and again and again faith has risked being suffocated in the embrace of power. The struggle for the freedom of the Church, the struggle to avoid identifying Jesus’ Kingdom with any political structure, is one that has to be fought century after century. For the fusion of faith and political power always comes at a price: faith becomes the servant of power and must bend to its criteria.”
“It’s possible for communists to work towards a classless, stateless social organization based on common ownership of the means of production without either coveting or stealing.”
Would you care to point out when and where that’s ever been done?
Esau,
What if, say, a large number of orthodox American Catholics decided to move to one county somewhere in the US. I guess something like this would kind of reverse the effect of globalization that’s slowly making the world homogeneous. Instead, people would start using the freedom of not being tied to one physical location that globalization provides to form their own geographic communities. Yet they’d still operate under all the laws of the area where they live (obviously their presence would have an effect on their local laws, but that’s a normal result of democracy).
I guess I’ve moved past politics into day dreaming… but I think it could be cool.
Brian,
Not exactly what you are talking about but since you are daydreaming.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J
What if, say, a large number of orthodox American Catholics decided to move to one county somewhere in the US.
Brian,
I think that’s what the Domino’s Pizza guy had in mind:
Domino’s Pizza Founder to Build Catholic Town
NEW YORK — A former marine who was raised by nuns and made a fortune selling pizza has embarked on a $400 million plan to build the first town in America to be run according to strict Catholic principles.
Link:
Domino’s Pizza Founder to Build Catholic Town
Sounds like a town conceived but nonetheless headed toward abortion.
Bill912 wrote (quoting another commenter): “It’s possible for communists to work towards a classless, stateless social organization based on common ownership of the means of production without either coveting or stealing.”, and then asks:
“Would you care to point out when and where that’s ever been done?”
Utopian communes have been set up on a purely voluntary basis many times. All property held in common, little or no private ownership, all working for the common good. These arrangements were especially popular in the U.S. in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Among the better known proponents of voluntary utopian communism was Bronson Alcott, father of the well-known childrens’ author, Louisa May Alcott. Together with several other families, the Alcotts set up the Fruitlands commune where they planned to live by producing fruits and vegetables. The reformers were “. . . communists in property (for all property belonged to God), anarchists in government, . . . and vegetarians in diet. In everything, they aimed at absolute freedom from instituted authority . . .
“. . . unfortunately, wonderful as these ideas were, they were not at all practical . . . (N)ot everyone was willing to work as hard as was necessary. Many saw the community as an opportunity to be housed and fed while sitting in apple trees writing poetry or thinking great thoughts. After all, it is much easier to dream of utopias than to plant seeds on your hands and knees. Then, too, often the philosophers would travel off to lecture and spread the news of the utopia, leaving Mrs. Alcott, the children, and (one) man to do all the work.”http://www.alcott.net/frame.html
As might be imagined, the commune didn’t survive two winters; the Fruitlands families had to move back to their various towns and farms and get real jobs.
The same pattern seems to repeat itself over and over in each such communal arrangment. In non-authoritarian communal arrangments in which the necessities of life are provided for, many people tend to drift into a way of life that involves their doing little or no productive work. Pretty soon, only a few are working, and the product of their work is supporting the rest. The few go-getters who do most of the work begin to resent the lay-abouts, and complain about the inequity. And it is inequitable! The lay-abouts resent the go-getters complaining – they are trouble-makers. And they are making trouble! And so the whole arrangement ultimately blows up in everyone’s face.
Acts 4:32 describes the first Christians as sharing their possessions – from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.
Most religious orders strive to do the same. I imagine most well-adjusted families also do this. These have been the longest lasting institutions which have sustained ‘communism’ over long periods. The problem is not that this type of common ownership is intrinsically evil, but in the practical difficulties which arise on scaling these ideals up to entire societies and the whole human family where some people, despite saying ‘Our Father’, don’t want to share what they have or to cheat. Original Sin?
The Jesuit Reductions popularized in the movie The Mission were an interesting example of a ‘christian communist’ society which might have continued indefinitely were it not for external interference.
Read St. Thomas More’s Utopia;
oh yeah, incidentally, it isn’t the Communism-supporting book some folks (e.g., Marx) make it out to be.
“Entire societies” were the examples I was looking for. My fault for not being specific. But I agree with Joe and Marion; fallen human nature makes communal societies unworkable.
The problem is not that this type of common ownership is intrinsically evil, but in the practical difficulties which arise on scaling these ideals up to entire societies and the whole human family where some people, despite saying ‘Our Father’, don’t want to share what they have or to cheat. Original Sin?
I know of no Catholic writer who claims that common ownership is intrinsically evil. It is not. It is the denial of the right of private ownership that is evil. And Communism in its pure form argues that all forms of private ownership must be purged from the society in order for the workers’ revolution to be successful. That’s the evil. It is the tyranny; “the Communist revolution cannot succeed while the bourgeouisie own property or exercise power”; they “must be smashed, so that the people can fully rule.”
That is what is evil. Smashing some people so that “The People” can rule.
Thus we have thousands and tens of thousands killed in Pol Pot’s “killing fields”, Stalin’s purges, and the millions more dead during Mao’s “Cultural Revolution”.
Horrific violence. Incalculable death toll. Incalculable evil.
Statist Communism = Bodies
Marion,
You’ve put some rather interesting thoughts here.
But, what is your definition though of ‘common ownership’?
If this means to strive for the goal where folks have equal ownership of certain properties, etc.; at what point exactly does such a pursuit continue to be considered ‘Christian’ when it ultimately leads to acts of tyranny rather than the Christian sentiments it was supposed to espouse?
There is a hidden evil there since an inevitable consequence of such an endeavor (this objective of achieving a certain equality amongst members of a society) can actually result, ironically, in an inadvertent and oppressive inequality, as the very nature of such a pursuit entails infringing upon the very rights of the individual and, thus, contradicting the very purpose of equality being sought in the first place.
all forms of private ownership must be purged from the society in order for the workers’ revolution to be successful.
There are many forms of communism. Some forms of communism simply call for peaceful movement toward common ownership without forbidding private ownership. In that form, it’s much like calling people to be Catholic without forbidding them to go different directions.
Which form of communism is that? Where has it ever been tried?
In our family and businesses for one. We don’t purge private ownership by any revolution. It’s all voluntary.
Nearly all forms of state-sponsored Communism have insisted that the Workers’ Paradise cannot come into existence nor remain safe until all opposition – both from within and without – has been purged. The body count that results is rationalized as a “necessity” to secure the Worker’s Revolution.
This is pure evil.
Small groups of people voluntarily agreeing to hold things in common, is never in itself evil. It is the purging of the opposition that is evil, and the coercion to keep the system in effect that is evil.
In our society, most of the means of production are held privately, and the workers work hard to earn the money they need to support their families. The State takes a portion of their earnings in the form of the income tax, the proceeds from which go to fund 1) the common defense, and 2) a safety net for those unable to work, i.e. the disabled, children, the retired, and those who are “between jobs”.
This sounds like a pretty good balance to me.
Well, that depends.
Remember, when creating a welfare state, there can still be harm done to various individuals (especially the more unfortunate ones) in that the proceeds that come from such people’s taxes can actually become such a huge burden for the common person that s/he can be forced into poverty all because of it; thus, excerbating the very situation the society is attempting to correct.
What, no post about how the post Vatican II Church is in apostasy?
What is this blog coming to?
:-p
Give it time.
Dear Esau,
I agree with you, but I would ask whether you agree with me that the modern welfare state is to be distinguished from a system of “safety nets” for those truly in trouble.
If I were in a serious automobile accident, and unable to work and support myself for a long time . . . If I grew too old and sick to work, and had not enough savings to live on. . . . maybe my family would help out, but what if they couldn’t, or didn’t?
There are people truly in need. There should be a safety net for them. . . . for me, if I ever need it. And I’m glad that we do have that.
The welfare state is another story altogether. The phenomenon of generation after generation of families living in a culture of hopelessness, unemployment, drug-use, jail, violence, despair, fatherlessness, unemployment, lack of education -this has got to be one of the most troubling, vexing situations our country faces.
And that’s just many portions of blond-haired blue-eyed Appalachia I was describing! The urban centers with high minority populations are even worse off!
The welfare state obviously isn’t working. It is truly a black hole for the recipients.
But, anyway, a safety net – not a black hole – is a completely different story.
Abel: “‘Entire societies’ were the examples I was looking for.”
Abel: “‘Entire societies’ were the examples I was looking for.”
Not even the U.S.A. is an entire society. It is part of the world.
Maybe Bill is looking for one of those “sinister secret societies.”
Well mainly because it took a while for the Church (and I say this in the human sense) to react strongly against communism. Certain popes, whether innocently or not, indirectly aided the communists by not attacking them strongly. Then I believe some Catholic thinkers filially pointed out to the Pontiff (I can’t remember if it was John XXIII or Paul IV) that by not doing and doing such and such things, they are aiding the communists. Mainly it was accepting “softenings”, what can be called the Moscow-Vatican détente and convergence.
This was somewhat corrected eventually.
But the Devil is the one who commands the Sons of Darkness. And the Devil is one astute creature, so Communism did one of the best tactics ever.
It played dead.
Changed its name and image.
But its coming back(look at the rise of leftist presidents) and it will stronger. And since the West (yes the US) never really faught Communism as it should have. You don’t negotiate with evil.
SO thus you have why anti-communism movies are not out. Because public opinion is not being moved to a pseudo-anti-communism. Before those movies gave a false impression that the West was truly battling communism. False because it never really fought it head on.
I think the point is that communism can never be sustained to the exclusion of capitalism. Any communistic arrangement that has ever lasted has only done so by virtue of the outside, capitalistic, NATURAL economy supporting it. All of the monasteries and convents that survive under such conditions are firstly, authoritarian (as has been mentioned) and therefore subject each member to a certain level of hierarchical controls, benevolent though they may be. But, secondly, and more importantly, they obtain at least some of their means of support by having some manner of economic contact with outside capitalism (e.g. they accept donations, or sell their interally-produced wares, or at the very least barter with the outside world).
The point being, even “small communism” could never survive except by leaning on the capitalism of the outside world. To suppose otherwise is to misunderstand human nature and to deny the truth of the seventh and tenth commandments (or the eighth and tenth, if you’re a Prottie).
Domino’s Pizza Founder to Build Catholic Town
“This is not going to be a Catholic town,” Healy said. “We want the town to be open to everyone.”
There’s not going to be a special cable provider that doesn’t carry X-rated channels. The town isn’t going to be a Catholic utopia, where only practicing Catholics are welcome. And no one is dictating what can or, in the case of Ave Maria, can’t be sold within the boundaries of the town. There will not be any legal restrictions of contraceptives in the town of Ave Maria.
“It is critical to note that no restrictions will be enforced on contraceptives or any other inventory,” Ave Maria University founder Tom Monaghan and Barron Collier Cos. president Paul Marinelli said. “Neither will there be restrictions enforced on programming on cable television.”
even “small communism” could never survive except by leaning on the capitalism of the outside world
The “capitalism of the outside world” leans on our “small communism” as well.
The answer is Jewish influence
As for the Ave Maria comment,
well obviously, the US is not a Catholic country where the Gospel reigns, so morality won’t be protected.
The cap of the out and small commies comment,
Communism has always been supported by the outside world. And I’ll be as bold to say it is done on purpose.
And the Jewish influence comment…
Well that is a risky topic, and one might end up being labled anti-semetic for even pointing them out. Wrongly labed though…
My experience with Jewish friends and neighbors, colleagues, clients, former bosses, and former professors has been that they are wise, kind, human, shrewd, warm, humorous, caring, proactive, uniquely sane . . . in a word, wonderful.
I don’t stay where my friends are being put down. Good-bye.
Marion: No one is putting down Jews. I believe what Some Day was saying is that they are uniquely sensitive to tales of Nazism (and rightly so considering the Holocaust). But the analogue is not true when it comes to those in the groups killed by the Communists. I cannot say what the anonymous person posting before Some Day meant, as that one sentence doesn’t explain much.
There was a tremendous influence of Judaism (post Temple Talmudic Judaism and Khazars) on Communism.
Lenin was a Jew. Marx was a Jew. Freud was a Jew (Freud is important to communism because of the influence of psyhology on communism and the punishment of pyschiatric treatment to treat the religious specifically Christians) Trostky was a Jew. I am not sure if Hegel was a Jew. Marx was certainly a Jew.
Many Poles and Lithuanians (as two examples) thought that Jews became communists to gain power and influence over non Jewish parts of those two countries and cultures. Some of this is anti-semitism but not all. There were certainly a disproportionate number of Jews in the upper ranks of communism and great killings and oppressions of people during communism that was far greater than Nazism. (and yes without a doubt Nazism was a great pagan evil)
“The child of a Ukrainian kulak deliberately starved to death by the Stalinist regime is worth no less than a Jewish child in the Warsaw ghetto starved to death by the Nazi regime”
Courois, Stephane
Le live noir du commuisme: Crimes, terreur et repression
The collective Western memory, especially the United States of the Ukrainian Holocaust–the death of at least 7 million at the hands of Stalin is not nearly as known as the Holocaust of Jews (the Shoah) at the hands of Hitler and the Nazis.
The New York Times covered this up with Pulitzer prize winning liar reporters–which they later admitted.
Malcolm Muggeridge, a convert to Catholicsm, called this reporter and the New York Times coverage some of the greatest lying and great tragedy.
Stalin alone in numbers (not that numbers matter after a certain point)killed more people than Hitler. Stalin was called one of the greatest statesman by the New York Times and Duranty. Many Jews were influential in communist circles in the United States and are certainly influential in Hollywood today (that is not anti semitism but mere fact), to do movies (beyond Red Dawn) would be an admission that there was a communist threat, that some things the emotionally disturbed McCarthy said were true, that Algier Hiss was guilty, that the Rosenbergs (Jewish) were guilty, that the Hollywood “persecution” while not completely right did have a basis in reality. The Blacklisting and the like were bad, violated free speech, and hurt people (as does blacklisting of some conservatives today or specifically traditional religious points of view in Hollywood)–but there was a real communist influence and communism was a threat and a reality.
The push to organized non religious atheisistic Utopia with man at the head and psychiatry as the cure and supposed equality–has lead to the greatest mass murders in the history of mankind–far outranking the Crusades, Northern Ireland, the Spanish Inquisition, the 30 years war combined (the historical controversies notwithstanding)
Pol Pot in Cambodia, killing of half the population about 2 million
Mao tens of millions
Stalin probably 20 million over time
The victims of Communism are over 60 million just in deaths over less than a century. Some Jews (just as some Catholics were silent during the Nazis of WWII)were silent and even contributing to helping Communism.
Hollywood was promoting communism as were many in the media, and acadmia (not all in all of these certainly)
After the truth came out about Stalin, it was hard to swallow. Read about Duranty, the New York Times, the work that Malcom Muggeridge did.
Check out:
http://www.UkrainianGenocide.com
There is no mandatory courses in school about the Ukrainian Genocide, Stalin is not the demonized historical figure that Hitler is, there is no recognition of other genocides far worse than the terrible Shoah in terms of pure numbers or percentages–without the political advantages or financial renumneration.
Just as some countries (Germany for WWII for example) and some ethnic groups, or religious leaders (the Nazi Muftis) have specific and some blame–so do some Jews–that is historical fact and not anti-semitism.
Many Jews were involved in Communism in Russia during the advent of that evil. Many Jews were involved in communism in the USA. Many Jews have influence in Hollywood–this is why you do not have these type of movies. It is really that simple. This is not all Jews. There is also an ideological influence here. This does not mean Jews are bad. This does mean there are historical realities that are forgotten and anyone who mentions them or tries to discuss them are labelled as anti-semites.
But seriously, I have a few things to say about the above Forrest website. First, I don’t want in the middle of their debate, don’t want to make Sungenis’s problems mine, and don’t want any of my problems to be his, etc. But after listing accusations that could be made against Catholics, Mr. Forrest keeps asking at that site “Why single out ‘the Jews’?” when the answer is obvious: Catholics/Italians/Scots/Ugandans/Whoevers don’t have AIPAC; don’t have a Christian version of AIPAC; don’t have a European version of AIPAC in the works; don’t have a history of spying/killing Americans and getting away with it; don’t sit at the head of the Fed; don’t own most of the media in the U.S.; don’t have nuclear/biological/chemical weapons; don’t get billions in American tax money every year; don’t have a religion with a book like the Talmud which does see the “outgroup” (the “goyim”) as less than human; don’t have laws in place in many countries which make questioning the number who died during the Shoah a crime; don’t have their own national equivalent of “Holocaust Education” days and programs in schools all over the globe; aren’t “disproportionately represented (per sheer numbers) among the powerful, wealthy, those who hold college degrees and professorships, etc. The Scots aren’t trying to get us to bomb Iran; Israel is, and if you pick up a newspaper, you’re not going to hear about what Scotland is up to today, but you will hear a lot — a whole lot — about what Israel is doing or wants to do, and how the most powerful country on earth should get on it and make it so. And so on. One can’t have it both ways in making Israel the center of the universe per media attention and foreign policy, and then balking when people talk about it with any criticism. And these sorts of issues (e.g., Jewish interests vs. local interests) were relevant during the Weimar, too, which does explain (without justifying) Hitler’s attitude and rise (this will invariably be called “blaming the victim,” but that is rather like telling the girl in the miniskirt and hooker shoes, alone on a dark street at night, that she should keep it up because any rapist who inflicts evil on her is quite obviously a bad guy. An evil person’s being an evil person doesn’t make someone else’s decisions wise or good.).
Seriously, if we can speak of “Italian interests” or “Catholic interests” or “Muslim interests,” then we should be quite able to speak of “Jewish interests” and “Zionist interests” without fear, esp. when “Jewish interests” and “Zionist interests” are so often in conflict with “Christian interests” and “American interests.” That we can’t speak of these things without fear and hemming and hawing and falling over backwards and doing somersaults to assure, assure, assure that we’re not Nazis is just evidence that we need to start talking all the more and that there is something to talk about. (That said, anyone who does so around here without charity and prudence, or with any racialist attitudes is on my list)
http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/apologia/vpost?id=1800910&highlight=aipac
Check out this website. Remember that pre 67/68 (of course Truman’s 48 recognition nothwithstanding) the Soviet Union (communist era obviously) and strangely enough French (with Nuclear weapons and power) helped Israel the most (post 68 the United States was there)
The Soviet Union and communism were key components of the formation of Israel, most original Zionists were secular and SOCIALISTS. Read about the USS Liberty and learn the facts.
Jesus Christ called them “brood of vipers”.
To me that says enough. I’m no KKK, but I certainly have my reservations against them.
Tell me what good they have done that was not to their benefit and I’ll tell you where bigfoot lives.
Jesus Christ called them “brood of vipers”.
“Them” being some Pharisees and teachers of the law.
“Cook the truth in charity until it tastes sweet,” this famous quotation of St. Francis de Sales is the principle of our apostolic work. Fruitless discussions or, worse, uncharitable polemics never help to attract souls to the Lord. Again, St. Francis de Sales said: “One drop of honey attracts more bees than a barrel of vinegar.” The revealed truth of our Holy Catholic Faith is, in itself, attractive because of its depth, brilliance, and logic. Wherever it appears clothed in the beautiful garments of charity, it becomes ever more acceptable to those who might otherwise fear its inevitable consequences for our lives and the sharpness with which it cuts through our weaknesses and our excuses. The famous religious poet, Gertrude von Le Fort, wrote of the Church and the revealed Truth: “I have fallen in your Faith like in an open sword, and you have cut all my anchors.” How much more easier does a soul accept the grandness and the majesty of Divine Faith when it is presented with the merciful charity and patient meekness that Our Lord himself shows all the time to His children.
Basil,
I don’t think any of the recent comments above had anything to do with the Catholic Faith. I don’t even think that the commentors were even Catholic.
Those posts seemed nothing more than hateful anti-Semitic comments.
Argh!
Okay, I have to rescind my statement that no one is putting down Jews. Some Day (if I may be so bold as to speak for him) and I were not putting them down.
Others now are. And that should stop.
At the same time, I stand by all of my other statements. (Again, all but the one in which I said that no one was putting Jews down here.)
I thought we could have a rational debate (what was I thinking?) wherein we could mention the facts of the matter without degrading into (a) hatred on one end of the spectrum and (b)hypersensitivity at the mere mention of a disproportionate airing of the evils of Nazism vs. the evils of Communism. But I was wrong.
Maybe we can yet have that discussion. But, in order to do so, the conspiracy theorists need to cut it out.
To clear things up, Christ called CERTAIN individuals, who happened to be Jewish, vipers (and worse) … BUT that’s because (duh, seriously, BIGFATDUH) he lived in a Jewish culture and was Himself (again, DUH) JEWISH.
MAN. Talkin’ MOVIES here, people. Not why you think certain groups suck. Except for Nazis and Commies. Those two groups suck.
NOW KNOCK IT OFF!
I agree, Esau. Hopefully, they’ll swim back to the sewer they swam out of and cease polluting our waters.
Good grief, where do these people come from?
I thought we could have a rational debate (what was I thinking?) wherein we could mention the facts of the matter without degrading into (a) hatred on one end of the spectrum and (b)hypersensitivity at the mere mention of a disproportionate airing of the evils of Nazism vs. the evils of Communism.
Jared,
I’m all for that. Yet, the recent posters seemed more for spouting vile comments out of prejudice rather than seeking the intelligent discussion you seem to be suggesting.
Esau: Yeah, that’s what just I’m sayin’.
Buncha … so-and-so’s.
…
It’s taking all of my restraint to avoid posting EXACTLY what I’m thinking.
So, instead, I’m gonna go work out.
Ed Asner, Wanna-be commie, comes to mind after reading the heading.
Gotta love the…er…gentlemen who have posted of late. Real brainy.
http://www.UkrainianGenocide.com
ARGUE THE FACTS BELOW AND DO NOT INSULT ME OR OTHERS WITH AD HOMINEM ATTACKS. IF YOU CAN (ACCURATELY) LINK ISLAMIC TERRORISTS TO NAZISM YOU CERTAINLY CAN LINK SOME (CERTAINLY NOT ALL OR INHERENTLY) JEWS TO COMMUNISM AND HOLLYWOOD AND SEE THE LINK. DISCUSS THE HISTORICAL FACTS AS YOU WOULD WITH A PRO NAZI MUSLIM MUFTI OR EVEN SOME BAD CATHOLICS OR LAPSED CATHOLICS OR ANY OTHERS WHO WERE ON BAD SIDES OF HISTORY. YOU ARE ASKING A QUESTION WHY? HOLLYWOOD HAS NOT FOCUSED ON COMMUNISM AND ITS EVILS:
There was a tremendous influence of Judaism (post Temple Talmudic Judaism and Khazars) on Communism.
Lenin was a Jew. Marx was a Jew. Freud was a Jew (Freud is important to communism because of the influence of psyhology on communism and the punishment of pyschiatric treatment to treat the religious specifically Christians) Trostky was a Jew. I am not sure if Hegel was a Jew. Marx was certainly a Jew.
Many Poles and Lithuanians (as two examples) thought that Jews became communists to gain power and influence over non Jewish parts of those two countries and cultures. Some of this is anti-semitism but not all. There were certainly a disproportionate number of Jews in the upper ranks of communism and great killings and oppressions of people during communism that was far greater than Nazism. (and yes without a doubt Nazism was a great pagan evil)
“The child of a Ukrainian kulak deliberately starved to death by the Stalinist regime is worth no less than a Jewish child in the Warsaw ghetto starved to death by the Nazi regime”
Courois, Stephane
Le live noir du commuisme: Crimes, terreur et repression
The collective Western memory, especially the United States of the Ukrainian Holocaust–the death of at least 7 million at the hands of Stalin is not nearly as known as the Holocaust of Jews (the Shoah) at the hands of Hitler and the Nazis.
The New York Times covered this up with Pulitzer prize winning liar reporters–which they later admitted.
Malcolm Muggeridge, a convert to Catholicsm, called this reporter and the New York Times coverage some of the greatest lying and great tragedy.
Stalin alone in numbers (not that numbers matter after a certain point)killed more people than Hitler. Stalin was called one of the greatest statesman by the New York Times and Duranty. Many Jews were influential in communist circles in the United States and are certainly influential in Hollywood today (that is not anti semitism but mere fact), to do movies (beyond Red Dawn) would be an admission that there was a communist threat, that some things the emotionally disturbed McCarthy said were true, that Algier Hiss was guilty, that the Rosenbergs (Jewish) were guilty, that the Hollywood “persecution” while not completely right did have a basis in reality. The Blacklisting and the like were bad, violated free speech, and hurt people (as does blacklisting of some conservatives today or specifically traditional religious points of view in Hollywood)–but there was a real communist influence and communism was a threat and a reality.
The push to organized non religious atheisistic Utopia with man at the head and psychiatry as the cure and supposed equality–has lead to the greatest mass murders in the history of mankind–far outranking the Crusades, Northern Ireland, the Spanish Inquisition, the 30 years war combined (the historical controversies notwithstanding)
Pol Pot in Cambodia, killing of half the population about 2 million
Mao tens of millions
Stalin probably 20 million over time
The victims of Communism are over 60 million just in deaths over less than a century. Some Jews (just as some Catholics were silent during the Nazis of WWII)were silent and even contributing to helping Communism.
Hollywood was promoting communism as were many in the media, and acadmia (not all in all of these certainly)
After the truth came out about Stalin, it was hard to swallow. Read about Duranty, the New York Times, the work that Malcom Muggeridge did.
Check out:
http://www.UkrainianGenocide.com
There is no mandatory courses in school about the Ukrainian Genocide, Stalin is not the demonized historical figure that Hitler is, there is no recognition of other genocides far worse than the terrible Shoah in terms of pure numbers or percentages–without the political advantages or financial renumneration.
Just as some countries (Germany for WWII for example) and some ethnic groups, or religious leaders (the Nazi Muftis) have specific and some blame–so do some Jews–that is historical fact and not anti-semitism.
Many Jews were involved in Communism in Russia during the advent of that evil. Many Jews were involved in communism in the USA. Many Jews have influence in Hollywood–this is why you do not have these type of movies. It is really that simple. This is not all Jews. There is also an ideological influence here. This does not mean Jews are bad. This does mean there are historical realities that are forgotten and anyone who mentions them or tries to discuss them are labelled as anti-semites.
Long and loud, wasn’t it? I never read either.
Um, back to the original topic, am I the only one who thinks Dr. Zhivago was anti-communist?
Nunquid incassum constituta est illa universalis oratio Ecclesiae, quae offertur pro perfidis Judaeis a solis ortu usque ad occasum, ut Deus et Dominus auferat velamen de cordibus eorum, ut ad lumen veritatis a suis tenebris eruantur?
Jared wrote, “I thought we could have a rational debate . . . wherein we could mention the facts of the matter without degrading into hatred . . . “
Even the most rational, measured discussion, carried on apart from the love of Jesus, degrades quickly into hatred, or lust, or anger, or all of the above.
In discussions taking place without the love of Christ, even among Christians discussers. . . the whiff of brimstone is unmistakable.
Holy Patriarchs of the Jewish people, ancestors of Our Lord Jesus Christ, pray for us.
Love of God that does have hate of Evil is the love of an eventual traitor.
So remember that when jumping to conclusions about lack of love.
And the Holy Patriarchs are Catholic now by the way. You can speak of St. Elias and so on…
Trust me this is not anti-semetism. That is a tactic that becomes an auto-defense. Horrible things done to Jews became a defense for any wrong doing they do. That is not right either. No one will excuse a rapist only because he was raped and his ancestors were too. My things against any other religion are the basically the same…
They are not Catholic. And that says it all.
It is a ferocious lack of charity to ascribe a man’s sin or error to some personal attribute other than his need for Christ.
“Those Hispanics – all illegally here and won’t assimilate, ruining our country.” The devil in Hell tries to teach us to say that.
“Those blacks – all illegitimate and using drugs.” The devil in Hell tries to teach us to say that.
“Those Jews – all Communist sympathizers.” The devil in Hell tries to teach us to say that.
And here’s what the devil in Hell tries to teach non-Catholics to say about us:
“Those Catholics – trying to make the Pope in Rom head over all of us.”
“Those Catholics – their celibate priesthood is full of perverts who prey on children.”
No group, no religion has a monopoly on sin and error – sin and error are in all of us. Only Christ is the answer. And he who truly has Christ looks with love and compassion on his neighbor who has fallen into error – not pointing the finger, not accusing, not condemning, but praying and working for his conversion. The way Christ and His apostles did for us.
To refrain from accusing, but instead to pray, that is just what the Devil in Hell hates for us to do. He wants us pointing the fingers at others, just as two scorpions in a bottle point their stingers at each other.
The banner of Christ carried by a scorpion. What better way to ensure that Christ’s message falls on deaf ears?
Marion: At whom is your latest post directed? Directed at some, I could see it as justified. Directed at others, it seems falsely accusatory. I’m curious as it’s rather vague.
How about a banner carried by a crusader?
Now don’t tell me you would disagree with St.Bernard, St. Louis IX and St. Ferdinand III
and so on…
The banner of Christ carried by a scorpion.
If the Banner of Christ is carried by a scorpion, what does that make the Scorpion King?
A Catholic if he is indeed a baptized fighter fot Christ.
Deus Vult!
Since when is the devil in hell?
And here’s what the devil in Hell tries to teach
What are you trying to teach?
That Kumbaya is the best song ever. (After the Pinky and the Brain intro)
Especially when holding hands “in community”.
Man I regret posting that.
This is a real discussion and I am trying to express my humble opinions with lack of virtuos seriousness.
Sorry.