Marxism, Keynesianism, and Fabianism (not the singer)

“You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner.” — George Bernard Shaw

In his article (“The Socialization of America”), Dr. David Noebel connects some dots that one wouldn’t think necessarily relate to one another. He finds an eerie convergence in the 19th century:

In retrospect, we might discover that 1883 was a most significant year. We’re familiar with 1848 giving us The Communist Manifesto and 1859 giving us The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. But 1883 gave us three portentous happenings. These seemingly unrelated happenings turned history toward socialism.

He’s referring to the death of Darwin and the births of John Maynard Keynes and the Fabian Socialist society. Noebel believes there is a direct connection between the latter two and attitudes and programs being advanced in the “People’s House” — and he names names:

Most Americans are totally unaware that the U. S. House of Representatives crawls with a large, well-organized assembly of socialist organizations. These organizations are dedicated to (a) bringing about the destruction of the capitalist economic system (portrayed as greedy, conservative, religious, and/or filthy rich) and (b) slowly but surely bringing production, education, food, and health care under the complete control and regulation of the federal government.

Noebel also reveals some personal data about Keynes and his Cambridge classmates that isn’t exactly common knowledge:

Zygmund Dobbs conducted the research for Keynes at Harvard and summarizes the political, moral, and economic slant of Keynes and his friends at Cambridge University: “Singing the Red Flag, the highborn sons of the British upper-class lay on the carpeted floor spinning out socialist schemes in homosexual intermissions …. The attitude in such gatherings was anti-establishmentarian. To them the older generation was horribly out of date, even superfluous. The capitalist system was declared obsolete and revolution was proclaimed as the only solution. Christianity was pronounced an enemy force, and the worst sort of depravities were eulogized as ‘that love which passes all Christian understanding.’ Chief of this ring of homosexual revolutionaries was John Maynard Keynes … Keynes was characterized by his male sweetheart, Lytton Strachey, as ‘a liberal and a sodomite, an atheist and a statistician.’ His particular depravity was the sexual abuse of little boys.”

It looks as if the “salt of the earth” (i.e., Christians) will have to continue to stay the hand of socialist progressives even as they incur the wrath of these so-called “liberals”:

The Christian worldview endorses sound or hard money, fiscal responsibility, saving for a rainy day, deferred gratification, paying off monthly credit card bills, living within one’s means, etc. Keynesian economics, by contrast, argues for consumption, extravagance, and not providing for the future, arguing that “the great vice is saving, thrift, and financial prudence.” …. Keynesians love huge national spending, debt, and high inflation — anathema to Christians and conservatives.

The following also can be found on Dr. Noebel’s website:

What is Globalization? It is the collective effect of purposeful and amoral manipulation that seeks to centralize economic, political, technological and societal forces in order to accrue maximum profit and political power to global banks, global corporations and the elitists who run them.

“Free Trade” is the central mantra. Globalization is set against national sovereignty, closed borders, trade tariffs and anything that would restrict its goals and methods used to achieve them.

Globalization promotes regional and global government, a one-world economic system of trade and a form of fascism where global corporations and their elite control the policies and directives of individual governments.

The original and primary perpetrators of modern-day globalization number only in the 100’s, representative of which, but not exclusively, are members of The Trilateral Commission.

———-

Down the memory hole

I just can’t help but wonder if the future of electronic publishing includes President Obama’s Ministry of Truth informing me, through my e-book reader, of whether I am today at war with Eastasia or Eurasia.

So writes cyber-libertarian Phil Elmore in his article “The Pitfalls of Electronic Publishing.” For some time now Elmore has been commenting on the convergence of technology and politics on WorldNet Daily.

The dazzling technological wonders with which we are daily confronted have doubtlessly been a boon to mankind — but there are also dire implications of living in the Age of High Tech:

The digital age has many advantages, but its principle disadvantage is that an electronic file – particularly one served from some remote location, such as to subscribers to a service – can be changed at will and at whim. Remember the outcry when Steven Spielberg digitally revised “E.T.: The Extraterrestrial”, removing guns from the hands of government agents and replacing them with walkie talkies? Do you recall the irritation among “Star Wars” fans when Lucas announced that only his new, digitally revised versions of the original “Star Wars” trilogy would be coming to DVD? (Those of us who remember Han Solo preemptively shooting Greedo must be content to see it on VHS. In the digital age, Greedo gets off a shot first.) Now picture, if you will, this type of instantaneous revision coming to books.

For any totalitarian government that wishes to stuff real history down the memory hole (as in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-four), the technology is already here. Even now there may be who-knows-how-many “Winston Smiths” somewhere in the world busily assigned to the task:

What is to stop an increasingly controlling government – or a publishing authority attempting to curry favor with that government – from [the instantaneous revision and the rewriting of history]? Nothing, if the “books” we read are only zeroes and ones.

But not just books: I heard recently (and assume it’s true) that an estimated 93 to 97 percent of all money in the world is also “only zeroes and ones.”

—Mike Gray