The Dialectical Deception

NOTE: The following is protected by federal copyright law and is an excerpt from the book Marxianity written by Brannon Howse and is not to be published online. The footnotes that document the content in this article are found in the book Marxianity or the eBook.

A recent survey indicates that 58 percent of American millennials would like to live under some form of socialism. That’s disheartening, of course, but perhaps it’s not surprising that such a large contingent of the general population would be taken in by socialism, considering that mainstream evangelicalism itself has become a haven for socialistic philosophy. The acceptance comes largely in the form of embracing Liberation Theology, the merging of Marxism and Christianity, hence, my term, Marxianity.


The Latest Forms of Marxist Deception

Marxism has never had qualms about seducing people into believing in the tenets of socialism without revealing the truth of what’s going on. It’s part of what’s known as the ‘Hegelian Dialectic process.’ The strategy consists of creating cultural conflict by generating scenarios that intentionally pit one view of an issue against another, and then proposing a socialistic approach (the economic system underlying communism) as the solution. The dialectic—two things set against each other—is intended to destabilize the non-socialistic culture and to hoodwink the unsuspecting populace into accepting a socialistic option.

One shocking example of how this worldview has infiltrated the culture is through the acceptance of powerful thinkers like Sigmund Freud. The “father of modern psychology” believed Christians are insane because of their belief in absolute truth. He also affirmed that truly sane individuals are those who have not rejected their natural inclinations toward lust, cannibalism, incest, and killing. He claimed that the ones who have gone crazy are Christians who suppress these natural inclinations.

So, what is the effect of a highly regarded historical figure like Freud seeding the culture with the thought that Christians are insane? We see the result in many forms around us today. For example, people who hold to biblical truth about sexuality are called homophobic. They have an unreasonable fear or phobia. There are other, non-sexual, phobias as well.

If you understand the worldview of Islam and know that it is evil, that it is not consistent with a Constitutional Republic, that it is an anti-Christ religion seeking to persecute Christians and Jews, and that it has a goal to create a global caliphate, and then you speak against Islam, you are Islamophobic. Again, you have an unreasonable fear. The label “crazy” applies primarily to Christians and conservatives. The “phobic” terminologies are used regularly to shame, embarrass, and silence those who speak truth.

Another significant influencer from the past is Fredrick Nietzsche who said, “God is dead.” You’ll remember, too, that he was a hero of Adolf Hitler who liked to have his picture taken staring fawningly at a bust of Fredrick Nietzsche. Nietzsche believed in master-and-slave morality, and thought Christians could easily be enslaved because of their belief in absolute truth and because of their compassion for the sick and infirm. Nietzsche wanted to create a superman race and even liked to call himself, “Frederick Nietzsche, the Antichrist,” or sometimes simply, “the Antichrist.”

This is all in keeping with the vision of the Frankfurt School, of which I’ve written about extensively in my other books. The theme of its followers is that they hated Christians and God, but the key to understanding the process by which they infiltrate the whole of society with this hatred is through the “patron saint,” Georg Hegel. He taught the idea of thesis and antithesis—generate an idea and its opposite. Once the conflict between the ideas becomes widely known, they can be merged to create a new idea, or thesis, a Marxist solution.

The Frankfurt School came to America in 1933 at the invitation of John Dewey—the same John Dewey who signed the Humanist Manifesto and helped start the Socialist Society as well as the American Civil Liberties Union with communist, Roger Baldwin. Dewey studied the Russian patterns of education—in Russia—during the 1920s and 30s and returned to America to teach at Columbia University. Dewey co-founded the National Education Association and also brought the Frankfurt School to America.

Started in Germany in 1923, the school leadership consisted of a number of people of Jewish descent who became nervous about Hitler’s intentions and emigrated to America with the help of Dewey. Dewey placed them at Brandeis, Berkeley, and Princeton, to foment the cultural revolution. But since the Frankfurt School’s followers couldn’t openly call their philosophy “Marxism,” they called it “political correctness.”

The targets for change became every power center or power structure in society—the family, the church, education, media, and the government. Most importantly, the strategy required that the morality of the culture be undermined.

And it’s working quite well. When they came to America in 1933, the United States was largely a God-fearing nation. There was a heavy emphasis on belief in God, absolute truth, the Ten Commandments, right and wrong, and no sex before marriage. Obviously, that was not practiced by everyone, but actual, country-wide practice is not the issue. The underlying principles of morality were accepted, even if not always put into practice. The idea of being a virgin until marriage was accepted. Couples did not cohabitate before marriage. And abortion was not an option. Although homosexuality went on in the shadows, it was not considered a legitimate lifestyle.

A number of examples of how this conservative morality played out are quaint—and frankly, a little silly—even by biblical standards, but they reflect an attempt at “moral purity.” In the 1960s show I Love Lucy, for instance, husband and wife Ricky and Lucy could not be shown in the same bed together. They had twin beds (so did Rob and Laura Petrie on the Dick Van Dyke Show). And when Lucy did manage, somehow, to get pregnant, scriptwriters were not allowed to use the word “pregnant.” And despite the quirkily seductive ambiance of I Dream of Jeannie, Jeannie was not allowed to show her navel in the mid-rift gap of her genie costume. So, it’s clearly arguable that America was morally conservative when the Frankfurt School came to town. And with hyper aggression, they went after sexuality, the family, and the American male as the legitimate patriarch of family and society. The Frankfurt School set about to destroy the perceived differences between masculinity and femininity.

Does that go on today? Absolutely. And by destroying the American male, cultural Marxists knew they could create bigger government, the ultimate goal of Marxism.


Tolerant Morality


Marxists surreptitiously destroy the family, the incubator for passing on the values of a Constitutional Republic and the free market system. They undermine the standard for what men are to do when it comes to family, children, and faithfulness to a spouse. As a result, the family starts to break down, and Uncle Sam becomes the daddy through a welfare state. To create acceptance of Marxism or the socialistic philosophies of Karl Marx, you have to change the values and morality of the society.

They do this by creating a “manufactured crisis.” It has been done on purpose so that people will accept socialism. And it’s manufactured largely to bring about the demise of biblical values in American society.

In 1965, socialist Herbert Marcuse wrote a paper called “Repressive Tolerance,” in which he espoused a strategy for dealing with people who are Christians. They tend to be “in the way” because they believe in absolute truth, a worldview dismissed by social progressives as “intolerant.” Jesus, of course, to progressives, is the most intolerant, for it was in John 14:6 that He declared, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes unto the Father, except by me.” He also describes biblical truth as a narrow way: “narrow is the way, and few find it; broad is the path to destruction.”

Postmodernism, in extreme contrast, says truth and reality are created by man, not by God. If you’re a postmodernist who believes in a spiritual hereafter, you end up with universalism, the idea that everybody is going to get to heaven. Of course, the secular humanists, among progressives, believe you die and that’s it, but very few people today are truly secular humanists.

One of the most dominant worldviews today is cosmic humanism, also known as the New Age Movement. Both believe that the thought of heaven being open to people only through Jesus Christ is far too narrow a concept. It is “intolerant” of those who don’t believe that.

So how do cultural Marxists deal with intolerant Christians who believe in absolute truth, salvation through Christ alone, the exclusivity of Jesus Christ, the traditional definition of marriage, and biblical morality? How do you deal with free market capitalism that is based on individualism, individual work, and individual responsibility? After all, these beliefs impact the Christian view of law, science, economics, family, history, and education. The way Marcuse proposed is to portray Christians as the enemy, and he wasn’t alone in his plan.

Karl Marx hated Christians; Sigmund Freud hated Christians; Frederick Nietzsche hated Christians, and of course, so did Georg Hegel. To demonize the hated group, each of them regarded Christianity and capitalism as the source of suffering for all who are oppressed.

Herbert Marcuse proposed setting up a victim coalition, a cadre of people who could be convinced they are oppressed and then expose Christians and capitalists as the oppressors. The strategy includes casting Bible believers as narrow-minded bigots, intolerant, racists, chauvinistic, and greedy. That way, it is justifiable to be intolerant of Christian “intolerance.”  In his 1965 paper, Marcuse described the justification this way:

[quote] Liberating tolerance then would mean intolerance against movements from the right and toleration of movements from the left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance, it would extend to the stage of action, as well as of discussion and propaganda of deed as well as of word. [end quote]

In other words, he’s advocating that free speech and right to assembly of the “wrong” people should not be allowed because they’re chauvinistic, discriminatory, and likely to oppose the extension of public services, social security, Medicare, et al. (i.e., the expansion of government involvement in people’s lives).

I know firsthand how this intolerance of speech and assembly of conservatives, capitalists, and Christians works. It’s exactly what happened to Worldview Weekend in April of 2018. Four out of the five rallies we planned were shut down. We had planned to host speakers on Islam and national security issues—experts such as Shahram Hadian, a former Muslim, now Christian pastor, and Chris Gaubatz, a former FBI agent, who infiltrated CAIR undercover. We were shut down because of groups like the Gamaliel Network, an organization based on the worldview of Saul “the Red” Alinsky, a Neo-Marxist.

In 1986, Gregory Galluzzo became the network’s founding director. His resume includes being a Jesuit priest and devotee of Alinsky who persuaded Barack Obama to move to Chicago and become a Saul Alinsky community organizer. Barack Obama admits that Galluzzo was largely responsible for his win over Hillary Clinton in the Iowa primary that set him on the trajectory to become president of the United States.

To shut down our rallies, the Gamaliel Network, along with Islamic groups, AntiFa, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (a communist front group) distributed the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all the hotels we were going to use and urged their followers to call the hotels and complain that Worldview Weekend is a hate group. They asked our scheduled hotels to refuse service to us. In most cases, the hotels went along, even though we had contracts in place for six months and spent thousands of dollars mailing 80,000 full-color magazines to promote our events in these five cities.

We had already decided that these would be our last five cities, other than our annual conference in the Ozarks, because the cost of security had become so high due to previous threats against our conferences. Yet, in the end, we couldn’t even meet in all five cities! Why? Because the strategy of Herbert Marcuse, the Frankfurt School, and the cultural Marxists succeeded in undermining our right to speech and assembly. We were one of the “wrong” groups—all because we “chauvinistically” promote the biblical role of men and women and traditional marriage.

Americans have been subject to this propaganda, this information operation, this culture war for decades. And lest you think this is just political, note well a book by Herbert Marcuse, written ten years before his call for intolerance for the intolerant. He laid the groundwork for undermining the moral well-being of America in a 1955 book called Eros and Civilization. The purpose of the book was to declare that whatever was not, at the time of his writing, mainstreamed and accepted in the area of sexual liberation should become mainstreamed and accepted. This includes homosexuality and all manner of other sexual deviations from biblical norms. And why would he want to do that? It’s all part of the same plan to destroy traditional morality, marriage, and the family as the means of passing on the values on which our society is based.

Our Founding Fathers believed the family was the incubator for the values that maintain our Republic. Part of what that means is that we don’t make laws which contradict the law of God. William Blackstone, the leading legal scholar for the Founding Fathers, wrote about that great purpose. He said that a Constitutional Republic is “based on the character and nature of God. What God has ruled for, we don’t rule against.” Further, a Constitutional Republic is not based on the will of the majority, the will of the 51 percent—what the Founding Fathers called “mobocracy.”

The law of God is best embodied in the Ten Commandments: thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not covet, thou shall not murder, etc. And this forms the basic moral code for most civilized nations. So, in America, if you’re going to have a cultural revolution, you must destroy morality and must bring practices into the mainstream which are not accepted and consistent with a traditional Judeo-Christian worldview.

Herbert Marcuse planned for socialists to attack the existing morality of the society and carry out an insidious cultural revolution that would usher in the need for bigger government and redistribution of wealth. And how is he doing? Look at the non-whites, the poor, or the sexual liberation movement. Look at the homosexual agenda, illegal immigrants, and radical feminists. Who is allegedly mistreating them? Who is depriving them of their desire to carry out their ideas and worldview? Christians and capitalists—anyone who accepts a biblical worldview.


This block is broken or missing. You may be missing content or you might need to enable the original module. Banner