By Sigrid Weidenweber
Having followed the disastrous histories of Socialist or Communist countries and studied the phenomenal failures they produced, anyone on the planet would have deduced, that this form of government is a new form of slavery and is to be avoided at all costs.
Yet, over and over, the world observed with unbelief and puzzlement, when another country fell into the same web of the communist spider. How could it happen? How was it possible that with all the examples of terrible outcomes from such governance people would fall for the socialist ideology once more? Did no one in Venezuela remember the likes of Stalin, Pol Pot, or of Mao when the populace voted for Hugo Chavez, a known ruthless communist union representative? Apparently they did not. Chavez died in March of 2013. However, his short reign enabled him to establish cadres of rabid organizers throughout his government and thereby ensure elections with predetermined outcomes.
Following his death, the power fell to his vice-president Nicolas Maduro, an even more cold-blooded communist organizer. Although, only an interim president, the Cuba- trained Maduro savagely suppressed his opposition and concentrated every shred of power and governmental force in his hands.
It is the company a person or a leader keeps that best describes the character and moral standing of the man. Maduro’s alliances and close power relations included such indecent, immoral derelicts as the leader of the Bolivian Alliance, Libya’s Moammar al Qadhafi, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. When the Venezuelan populace woke up to their communist reality of joblessness, hunger and oppression, it was too late. So, how was it possible for the old hollow slogans to have worked once more? This time in America.
Lately, many observers of this phenomenon have spent much time, thought, research and philosophical debate on the matter. The most interesting article I have lately read about the socialist phenomenon and its replication was by William Brooks in the Epoch Times, April 20-26, 2022, in the Opinion section. According to him, and the French political philosopher Raymond Aron, the slow conversion to socialist/communist thought has been accomplished through, what Raymond Aron termed, “The Opium of the Intellectuals.” This, the title of his 1955 published book, is based on Marx’s often quoted sardonic assertion “that religion is the opium of the people.”
Of course, this is a simple label to decry, defame and discredit the religions of any person seeking approbation from a higher spiritual source than the socialist elites.
Raymond Aron defines the problem with two profound quotes.
- “In a way, all sociologists are akin to Marxists because of their inclination to settle everyone’s account but their own.”
Well, we the lectured by these academics, have noticed especially during the recent Covid pandemic, that even during the time of health concerns, the inclination of the ruling class is to handle their accounts any way they like but not, as proscribed for the “simple-minded” public.
2)“The intellectual who no longer feels attached to anything is not satisfied with opinion merely, he wants certainty, he wants a system, the revolution provides him with his opium.”
To that I would add, “not only his opium but power!” Power to force the “ignorant” of this world to respond to his dictates. The contradictions in democratic societies always provide the fertile ground for progressive intellectuals to undermine the very societies, cultures and history they belong to. Especially French and American intellectuals are the worst critics of their democratic/
capitalistic institutions. However, when confronted with the outrages perpetrated by Russia, Cuba, China and Venezuela, to name just a few, they find excuses, cleverly obscuring the evidence and obfuscate to confuse their audiences.
And yet, all by themselves they could have never accomplished their goal but they were helped by America’s enemies. Adding to that, most Democracies promoted limitless freedom, freedom without responsibility. There was no attempt to require citizens to take a stake in insuring the viability of sanity and the beneficial enforcing of societal laws.
America during the Vietnam war became an open stage for every lunatic seeking attention. Drugs were liberally dispensed, adding even more insane notions to the picture of what constituted a free society. There were no checks and balances.
Furthermore, the well-to-do and the rich, in their desire to show their success, flaunted their jewels, their cars and yachts, building monumental palaces and buying islands. Not that they did not deserve what they had earned but their flamboyant life-style added envy into the tox mix of progressivism. And it was envy in the end, which turned the leaf. The refrain, “the rich must pay their fair share. The rich are taking from the poor,” and even the old Soviet canard, “the capitalist sucks the blood of his workers,” seems to have finally worked. After having undermined the universities and schools, sowed racism, devalued the churches, rewrote history and destroyed America’s statues, allowed ATIFA thugs to torment our citizens and criminals to roam, opened the border to the entire world—we now have only a very small chance to reclaim the sane Republic we know can exist.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Citizens Journal
Sigrid Weidenweber grew up in communist East Berlin, escaping it using a French passport. Ms. Weidenweber holds a degree in medical technology as well as psychology and has course work in Anthropology. She is co-founder of Aid for Afghans. Weidenweber has traveled the world and lived with Pakistani Muslims, learning about the culture and religion. She is a published author and lecturer. You can find her books on Amazon.com