The New York Times is a genocidal Marxist mouthpiece

The Katyn Massacre, some 22,000 victims of the USSR. Victims were ""intelligence agents, gendarmes, landowners, saboteurs, factory owners, lawyers, officials, and priests." The USSR attempted to blame the massacre on Nazi Germany at the Nuremberg Trials.

The Katyn Massacre, some 22,000 victims of the USSR’s murder machine. They were “intelligence agents, gendarmes, landowners, saboteurs, factory owners, lawyers, officials, and priests.” The USSR attempted to blame the massacre on Nazi Germany at the Nuremberg Trials.

by Ex-Leftist


It’s one thing for a newspaper to publish opinion articles that the paper’s editorial board disagrees with, but it’s another thing entirely for a newspaper to publish a Marxist professor’s eulogizing, gushing op-ed celebrating Karl Marx’s birthday and his work, eagerly calling for it to continue.

This is an endorsement.

Imagine if a newspaper published an op-ed written by a flaming Hitler lover, celebrating his birthday and his life’s work? It would be considered an endorsement of Hitler’s ideas and all hell would break loose.

But Marx? His ideas are now indeed quite mainstream, specifically on a cultural level regarding race, gender, and law. That’s how far the West has fallen. Popular social opinion is framed in no small part due to the contributions of people like Karl Marx and we’re to the point where it’s beginning to be openly celebrated as opposed to quietly kept secret.

Happy Birthday, Karl Marx. You Were Right! written by radical leftist associate professor Jason Barker is a perfect illustration of the severe moral and intellectual failings of the radical left. 

Barker tells us that Marx had “boundless intellectual enthusiasm” and rightly notes that “since the turn of the millennium countless books have appeared, from scholarly works to popular biographies, broadly endorsing Marx’s reading of capitalism and its enduring relevance to our neoliberal age.” Indeed, our institutions have been colonized by Marxist thought.

Barker points out that, “In the ‘Communist Manifesto,’ Marx and Engels wrote: ‘The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage laborers.'” In that, Marx and Engels declared physicians, lawyers, priests, poets, and scientists as paid tools of the bourgeoisie oppressor and thus enemies of the people. Thus as history has showed us, such as at the Katyn massacre, such people were rounded up in hordes and extra-judicially murdered in massive numbers. Millions of Russian Kulaks – a prosperous peasant class – were butchered, leading to the Holodomor.

And Baker says this without an apparent iota of moral consternation. Indeed why would he when he clearly endorses Marx’s declared war on society itself? Concern for millions of dead is not on this man’s radar.

He continues, “The key factor in Marx’s intellectual legacy in our present-day society is not ‘philosophy’ but ‘critique,’ or what he described in 1843 as ‘the ruthless criticism of all that exists: ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be.’ ‘The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it,’ he wrote in 1845.”

What Barker is describing here is now known as a Marxist method of social “analysis” called Critical Theory. The essence of Critical Theory is to criticize, or bash, existing social arrangements, morals, values, and the like, as constructs of ruling class oppression. In that vein of thought, of course, it means that society as a whole is an oppressive construct and must be dismantled. This has resulted in many young Westerners believing their civilization is inherently evil, their ancestors were wicked, their histories horrible, their heritage disgusting. The purpose of this bashing is to reduce the numbers of people willing to defend their countries, values, and heritage from outside attack, thus aiding the enemy in overthrowing them. Historical fact is played very loosely in such a way as to make Western capitalists – and white people in general – uniquely evil, woven into the Marxist narrative that what is required to rectify these evils perpetrated by this oppressor demographic is the complete social and financial dismantling of that demographic’s economy, culture, values, and institutions, to be replaced by those crafted by the radical vanguard.

This is not merely a “social justice” or “racial justice” movement. It’s running on the philosophical precepts of Marx and Engels which explicitly teaches that society as a whole must be dismantled and its remake tightly controlled by radical ideas. Anyone who does not go along is a “reactionary” and will be handled as such.

Today’s neo-Marxists** have added race and gender to the classical Marxist economic dimension: “Racial and sexual oppression have been added to the dynamic of class exploitation. Social justice movements like Black Lives Matter and #MeToo, owe something of an unspoken debt to Marx through their unapologetic targeting of the ‘eternal truths’ of our age. Such movements recognize, as did Marx, that the ideas that rule every society are those of its ruling class and that overturning those ideas is fundamental to true revolutionary progress.”

These Marxist narratives of class conspiracy theories were used in the founding of Black Lives Matter after the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri. “Hands up don’t shoot” was a BLM mantra for months until the US Department of Justice’s investigation showed it never happened, after which time the mantra was quietly shelved. That the shooting itself was proven to be a legitimate act of self-defense as Brown’s DNA was found inside Wilson’s vehicle, on his gun, and on his clothing validated Wilson and several reliable witness testimonies that Brown had reached into Wilson’s patrol vehicle and and struggled with his gun and tried to shoot him with it hasn’t stopped BLM from crying foul, nor have they discussed why they founded themselves based on a legitimate self-defense killing. Rather, the movement was in the works already and was simply looking for an incident as a PR machine to launch even though it was launched on the false premise that the Brown shooting was illegitimate.

Again, oppressive classes create social ideals that are taught as oppressive according to the tenets laid out in the Communist Manifesto and the resolution of that is dismantling these ideals, including the society they spring from, for the sake of “true revolutionary progress.”

We’ll see what is required for this true revolutionary progress to transpire shortly.

Barker continues, “We have become used to the go-getting mantra that to effect social change we first have to change ourselves. But enlightened or rational thinking is not enough, since the norms of thinking are already skewed by the structures of male privilege and social hierarchy, even down to the language we use. Changing those norms entails changing the very foundations of society.

To cite Marx, ‘No social order is ever destroyed before all the productive forces for which it is sufficient have been developed, and new superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society.””

Barker’s selective, careful quotation of Marx here is very interesting. As is usual, Barker makes a number of sweeping claims without providing anything other than the musings of a 19th century philosopher to qualify them. This is the typical approach of both Marxists and neo-Marxists alike: Every facet of society is created and rigged by the haves to oppress everyone else and the only solution to the issue is to tear down society, even its religious morals, traditional family structure (as noted in the Communist Manifesto), and even its very language as language is seen as a tool of oppression thus we’re seeing things like “hate speech” laws (which first appeared in the UN, as authored by the benevolent powers behind the Iron Curtain), microaggressions, etc. all aimed at the majority, mainstream populations of Western countries to undermine and control them.

Folks, this is nothing short of an all-out war against America and Western Civilization as a whole. They openly want to dismantle everything our civilization ever stood for and remake it in their Marxist image. Marxism is idolatry.

And it’s peddled in the pages of the New York Times.

Barker closes, “The transition to a new society where relations among people, rather than capital relations, finally determine an individual’s worth is arguably proving to be quite a task. Marx, as I have said, does not offer a one-size-fits-all formula for enacting social change. But he does offer a powerful intellectual acid test for that change. On that basis, we are destined to keep citing him and testing his ideas until the kind of society that he struggled to bring about, and that increasing numbers of us now desire, is finally realized.”

So Marxists are using us as lab rats, actively trying to tear down everything that Western Civilization has been because Marx taught that Western cultures and values are necessarily created by oppressors and not everyday people, because if this is done, everyone and everything will magically come out equal, because like, Utopia. Never you mind that this experimentation has already cost the lives of over 100,000,000 people. You have to break eggs to make an omelette, right?

Marx wasn’t deeply anti-social, he was just an “boundless intellectual enthusiast”!

Don’t bother wasting your time looking at other possible contributors to world events, social relations, and economic outcomes, because Marxism is a religion in which answers are not to be sought outside its central philosophy of class warfare.

And by the way, what is this mechanism to “true revolutionary progress” that Barker mentioned but wouldn’t detail? Let’s quote Marx’s 1848 article, The Victory of the Counter-Revolution in Vienna[T]here is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society and the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terror.

Engels added in his writing The Magyar Struggle, “The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.”

So Barker is telling us that untold numbers of murdered to the point of outright genocide in the way of forcing equal outcomes on us is legitimate, and that the lives of those millions standing in the way means nothing because Marx said so.

Good work, New York Times.

** Neo-Marxism (neo meaning new) is distinguished apart from classical Marxism by the former’s application of Marxist class conflict theory outside of the realm of pure economics and into gender relations, race relations, and so forth. Classical Marxists reject all but the economic as they see all conflicts arising from it, rather than a separate sense of gender or racial superiority. Neo-Marxist thought is far more prevalent in society as a whole and institutions such as academia and mass media than classical Marxism is. Neo-Marxist Critical Race Theory has produced such concepts as “white privilege” and “microaggressions.”