Lesbian Studies

A BENCHMARK EXPOSE' OF A SECRET ORDER WORKING TO DESTROY AMERICA'S HETEROSEXUAL CULTURE.

Reflection:
This is a reprint of a well researched document written by Dr. Atkinson, author of many books on how a well organized radical cartel is destroying the existing social culture in America.

In this article, I take one exception with the author for using the term "radical feminism." Therefore I prompt the reader to reflect on the term "feminism" in order to recognize its true form, which is "lesbianism."

Likewise I take exception with the author for not factoring the connection between modern feminism and lesbianism. His brilliant research and analyst falls short of identifying the root cause into the motives for destroying the heterosexual male, whereas the root is lesbianism.

Relatively, just like a general leading battle, first and foremost he must know who his enemy is. The same holds true for today's culture struggle. We must not allow the "Lesbian Mafia" to ride into power on their Trojan-Horse disguised as feminist.

WHO PLACED AMERICAN MEN IN A PSYCHIC "IRON CAGE"

The Thread of culture Marxism
By Dr. Gerald L. Atkinson

Part 1 in this series, 1-"The Radical Feminist Thread" [Vol.IV, No.2], was described in terms of its antecedent in the idealist Transcendental generation of the early to-mid 1800s. In that essay I observed that if the feminization of our culture, driven primarily by radical feminists bent on destroying hierarchical male-dominated culture, was the only aspect of American life that appeared ominous, we could probably rest assured that the cycles of American history would take care of it. But radical feminism is not the only linear thread in the complex nonlinear fabric of American civilization. The warp that supports the radical feminist weave in this fabric is "cultural Marxism," which has the potential to drive this chaotic' system into a precipitous disintegration. This essay is an attempt to describe the effects of culture Marxism in American life.

Suppose Societal Degeneracy...
Suppose you awoke one morning and realized that TV news, sports, and political pundit personalities, television sitcoms, television and Hollywood movies (plots and leading characters), were dominated by females and minorities of various races and ethnicity's. You'd notice that authority figures are now more likely to be portrayed by women and minorities, rather than by white men (who are portrayed as buffoons). Turn on the television; it is the age we now live in.

Suppose you visited any major university in America and perused the curriculum. You would find a vast spawning ground of non-content subjects and even whole departments set up to deal with everything from women's "studies," to race-based "culture studies, "to sexual orientation "studies, to "studies" of the popular culture. Just the natural dynamics of a free society seeking its right to the pursuit of happiness? Not by a long shot. Classic academic disciplines are "white male" vehicles of oppression. Relativism is now the watchword of "higher education."

Suppose you have just been terminated from your job because the affirmative action policies of your employer demanded a "remedy" that gave preference to women or minorities, or both. Or , if allowed [!] to compete, these unfortunates would be at the bottom of the "preference" scale used to judge entrance. Experiencing this you would feel right at home in America as it enters the 21st century.

Suppose you asked your children or grandchildren what they were learning in public school. You would most likely find that they were being subjected to teaching methods that explore the child's feelings, and build their "self esteem," even in such traditional disciplines as math, science, and English. You would also find that their test scores in national aptitude tests are declining--as they have continuously over the past three decades.-

If you have a son or grandson in the U. S. military, You will undoubtedly find him subject to frequent, periodic "sensitivity training" sessions aimed at purging him of his chauvinist cultural attitudes toward minorities--whether or not he possesses such attitudes.

Suppose you listened to the presidential political "debates" over the past two election cycles. You undoubtedly would have heard the phrase, "have the courage to change." Deliberately unspecified was the direction and nature of such change. It appeared that "change," simply for its own sake considered good enough. Change is indeed invigorating to those who feel that they are part of a great democratic process and tradition. After all, after having "won" the Cold War, maybe we can now lead the whole world to freedom!

Suppose you have listened to what passes as foreign policy "debate" over the past five years. If you listened carefully, you would have heard our leaders claim, "it's the right thing to do. This moral justification, without a shred of thought of the long-term consequences, has guided our foreign policy in Bosnia, Somalia, NATO-expansion, and China. Indeed, some believe this moralizing of foreign policy is simply the result of a cult of "personalizing" everything our politicians do--primarily for domestic political advantage.

Suppose you woke up one morning and noticed that one of the most brutalizing professions on earth, that of combat arms, is being treated as if it were just another bureaucratic job. That is, it is a candidate for the infusion of anyone who simply "chooses" it. The concept that "many apply, but few are chosen" is being supplanted by "let anyone who chooses, serve. Many of our political leaders are seriously considering opening ground combat branches to women. They have already opened aviation combat branches to women.

If you are one of those who forgot (or never knew) that combat service is an extremely brutal, physically demanding, and mentally punishing profession, you are a candidate for "having the courage to change," This despite the fact that armies, over many centuries and many civilizations, in particular the American military, have discriminated against various groups in their selection of the best warriors. And for good reason. The aged, the infirm, the mentally unsound, the weak, and especially women, have justifiably been discriminated against in selection for combat arms. This discrimination is as sound as that by which the human race, early in its evolution, learned to discriminate between predator and prey, friend or foe, and which knowledge set in motion the biological mechanisms of "fight or flee." Such discrimination ensured our survival as a species. Discrimination is not a flawed concept.

If you awoke one morning and realized that many of your fellow Americans believe that it is "the right thing to do" when the most helpless among us are condemned to death by a "woman's right to choose," you might wonder where we are headed as a culture, and who is behind that unspeakable obscenity, and why.

Finally, you may even become aware that an influential minority of the Boomer elite openly discusses and defends the practice of neonaticide (the purposeful killing of an infant soon after birth). According to a distinguished professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, "...we need a clear boundary to confer personhood on a human being and grant it a right to to life... What makes a living being a person with a right not to be killed?... the right to life must come...from morally significant traits that we humans happen to possess.

One such trait is having a sequence of experiences that defines us as individuals and connects us to other people. Other traits include an ability to reflect on ourselves as a continuous locus of consciousness, to form and savor plans for the future, to dread death and to express the choice not to die. "'Of course, under this definition any of us could have been killed, not only shortly after birth, but right up to adolescence or even young adulthood --subject to a decision by one of the "anointed" New Totalitarians.

Pinker observes that"...several moral philosophers have concluded that neonates are not persons...and thus neonatocide should not be classified as murder." Rational observers of this abomination remind us that infanticide is rightly and universally treated as a "...greatly aberrant act, the very definition of a moral horror." The point to be made here is that, if we finally awaken one morning and find the New Totalitarians presenting this abhorrence as "rational policy" for America, we might logically wonder where all of this stuff came from.

But suppose you were to learn that nearly all of the above observations are completely consistent with a design; that is, a concept , a way of thinking, and a process for bringing it about. And suppose one could identify a small core group of people who designed just such a concept and thought through the process of infusing it into a culture. Wouldn't you be interested on at least learning about such a core group? Wouldn't you want to know who they were, what they thought, and how they conjured up a process for bringing their thoughts into action? For Americans with even a smidgen of curiosity, the answer should be a resounding yes!

If such a core group could be found, then it would still depend on your personal "world view" as to its significance. If you believe in the "blind watchmaker," that is, cosmic and social events are random and guided only by the laws of nature, "evolutionary" in the sense of competing with other random events for survival in a stochastic world, you may choose to believe that such a core group was meaningless--it may have existed but so what? It may have been only one of an uncountable number of such groups in recorded history. And you may believe that any particular group's "window of opportunity" to influence future generations was passed by and did little to influence the course of America's history.

If you believe, instead, that nature has a design, that all events can be connected and man can make sense out of many of them if he only "connect all the dots." then you may believe that this small core group has great influence, even today, in American Culture. If this is your world view, you may (but not necessarily0 even believe in a "conspiracy" and "conspirators" which and who aim to alter our culture on a vast scale. It is clear, however, that irrespective of one's world view, it is informative to at least know of such a core group, what it believed, what it set out to accomplish, and what methods it followed to take action on its beliefs.
NOW MEET ITS AUTHORS...

Such a core group existed. That is, history identifies a small group of German intellectuals who devised concepts, processes, and action plans which conform very closely to what Americans presently observe every day in their culture. Observations, such as those made at the beginning of this piece, can be directly traced to their work and writings. They were members of the FRANKFURT SCHOOL, formed in Germany in 1923. They were the forebears of what some proclaim as "cultural Marxism," a radical social movement that has transformed American culture.

Cultural Marxism and "critical theory" are concepts developed by a group of German intellectuals who founded the Institute of Social Research at Frankfurt University in 1923. The Institute, modeled after the Marx Engels Institute in Moscow, became known as the " Frankfurt School." In 1933, when the Nazis came to power in Germany, the members of the Frankfurt School fled to the United States. While here, they migrated to major U. S. universities (Columbia, Princeton, and California at Berkeley). These intellectual Marxists included Herbert Marcuse, who coined the phrase, "make love, not war."

By promoting the dialectic of "negative criticism," that is by pointing out the rational contradictions in a society's belief system, the Frankfurt School 'revolutionaries' dreamed of a utopia where their rules governed. "Their Critical Theory had to contain a strongly imaginative, even utopian strain, which transcends the limits of reality." Its tenants would never be subject to experimental evidence. The pure logic of their thoughts would be incontrovertible. As a precursor to today's postmodernism" in the academic community, "...it recognized that disinterested scientific research was impossible in a society in which men were themselves not yet autonomous... the researcher was always part of the social object he was attempting to study." This, of course, is the current fetish for the rewriting of history, and the vogue for our universities' law, English literature,;re, and humanities disciplines.

The Frankfurt School studied the "authoritarian personality" which became synonymous with the male, the patriarchal head of the American family. A modern utopia would be constructed by these idealistic intellectuals by turning Western civilization upside down. This utopia would be a product of their imagination, a product not susceptible to criticism on the basis of the examination of evidence. This "revolution" would be accomplished by fomenting a very quiet, subtle and slowly spreading cultural Marxism which would apply to culture the principles of Karl Marx, bolstered by the modern psychological tools of Freud. Thus, cultural Marxism became a marriage of Marx and Freud aimed at producing a "Quiet revolution" in the United States of America. This Quiet revolution has been unfolding in America for over 50 years.

Why should it even be considered when the world's vast experiment with the economic theory of Karl Marx has recently gone down in defeat with the disintegration of Soviet communism? Didn't America win the Cold War? The answer is "yes, BUT." We failed to grasp that an intellectual elite had subtly but systematically transmogrified Marxist economic theory into cultural expression within American society. They introduced cultural Marxism into the mainstream of American life incrementally, over decades, while our attention was diverted elsewhere.

The vehicle for this introduction was the idealistic Boomer elite, those young middle-class and well-to-do college students who became the vanguard of America's counter -culture revolution of the mid 1960s--those draft-dodging, pot-smoking hippies who demonstrated against the Vietnam War and who fomented the destructive "women's liberation" movement. These New Totalitarians are now in power and control every public institution in our nation. But that''s getting ahead of the story.

The cauldron for rendering this witch's brew was the elite Boomer generation. The counterculture revolution of the 1960s was set in motion and guided intellectually by the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School--Herbert Marcuse, Eric Fromm, Theodor Adorno, and others. Its influence is now felt in nearly every institution in the United States. The elite Boomers, throwbacks to the dangerous Idealist Transcendental generation of the 1820s, are the "agents of change," who have introduced cultural Marxism into American life.

Herbert Marcuse was prominent in spreading Critical Theory's social revolution among students in the 1960s. It is instructive to review what he has written on the subject:

This sentiment was first expressed by the early 20th century Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci., who did in one of Mussolini's prisons in 1937 at the age of 46.

Gramsci conjured up the notion of a "quiet revolution" that could be diffused throughout a culture--over a period of time--to destroy it from within. He was the first to suggest that psychology could be applied culturally to break the traditions, beliefs, morals and will of a people and that this could be accomplished quietly and without the possibility of resistance. He deduced that "The civilized world had been thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2,000 years...and a culture based on this religion could only be captured from within.

Gramsci insisted that alliances with non-communist leftist groups would be essential to Communist victory. In our time, these would include radical feminist groups, extremist environmental organizations, so-called civil rights movements, minority led anti-police associations, internationalist-minded groups, liberal church denominations, and others. Working together, these groups could create a united front working for the destructive transformation of Western Christian culture. By winning "cultural hegemony," Gramsci pointed out that they could control the deepest wellsprings of human thought--through the medium of mass psychology. Indeed, men could be made to "love their servitude." In Frankfurt School terms, resistance to cultural Marxism could be completely negated by placing the resister in a psychic "iron cage."

The essential nature of Antonio Gramsci's revolutionary strategy is reflected in a 1990s book by New Totalitarian author Charle A.Reich entitled The Greening of America: "There is a revolution coming. It will not e like revolutions of the past. It will originate with the individual and the culture, and it will change the political structure as its final act. It will not require violence to succeed, and it cannot be successfully resisted by violence. This is the revolution of the New Generation. Of course this New Generation would be the author's elite Boomer generation. Indeed, this is the underlying premise of the implementation of cultural Marxism in American society by Frankfurt School "graduates. "This intellectual foundation is the basis of the Boomer elite's 1992 presidential election mantra, "Have the courage to change."

The Frankfurt School theorized that the authoritarian personality is a product of the patriarchal family. This idea originates from Frederich Ingels' The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State, an obscene work that promotes matriarchy.

Furthermore, Marx and Engels earlier wrote about the radical notion of a "Community of women" in the Communist Manifesto. And it was Karl Marx, in his 1845 work, The German Ideology, Who disparaged the idea that the family was the basic unit of society.

The "authoritarian personality" is not to be interpreted primarily as a handbook for the conduct of warfare against prejudice as such, but as a handbook for psychological warfare against the American white male for the purpose of rendering him unwilling to defend traditional and formerly held beliefs and values. In other words, the purpose was to emasculate him. Undoubtedly, this is what Institute for Social Research "academics" meant by "psychological techniques for changing personality."

The authoritarian personality premise of the Frankfurt School during the 1940s and '50s prepared the way in America for the ideological warfare against men as promoted by Herbert Marcuse and his band of social revolutionaries, under the guise of "women's liberation" and the New Left movement of the 1960s. The evidence that psychological techniques for changing personality is intended to ideologically emasculate American men is provided by Abraham Maslow, founder of Third Force Humanist Psychology, and promoter of the psychotherapeutic classroom: "...the next step in personal evolution is a transcendence of both masculinity and femininity to general humanness. The Marxist revolutionaries know exactly what they wanted to do and how to do it. They have accomplished much of their agenda.

But how can we claim the causes of the breakdown of our schools, and our universities--indeed, the very fiber of our culture---were the product of a tiny group of Jewish Communist intellectuals who emigrated from Germany to America in 1933? Given all of the special-interest groups involved in these activities, how can we trace these "causes" to the Frankfurt school? Look at some of the evidence.
For example, postmodern reconstruction of the history of Western Civilization (now prevalent in our universities) has its roots in the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School. This rewriting of history by postmodern "scholars" in America has only recently come under attack. Keith Windschuttle, in his book, The Killing of History, has severely criticized the rush to relativism by historiographers. What is truly astonishing, however, is that relativism has largely supplanted the pursuit of truth as a goal in historical study. George G. Iggers' recently published book, Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific objectivity to the Postmodern Challenge, reminds us of the now famous line by postmodernist Hayden White, "Historical narratives...are verbal fictions, the contents of which are more invented than found. "He quotes other postmodernists, mostly non-historians, who "...reinforce the primarily authoritarian weapons of our times. We now recognize the source of this postmodern assault--the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School who became experts in criticizing the "authoritarian personality" in American culture.

Herbert London refutes White's proposition by observing, "...if history is largely invention, who can say with authority that the American Revolution came before the French Revolution?" He observes that evidence has taken a back seat to inventiveness. He thus cuts right to the chase---the inventions of postmodernism, which are cutting successive generations of Americans off from their culture and their history, evolved directly from the cultural Marxist scholars of the Frankfurt School.

How did this situation come about in American universities? Gertrude Himmelfarb has observed that it slipped past those traditional academics almost unobserved until it was too late. It occurred so "quietly" that when they looked up, postmodernism was upon them with a vengeance. " They were surrounded by a tidal wave of faddish multicultural subjects such as radical feminism, deconstructed relativism as history and other courses" which undermine the perpetuation of Western Civilization. Indeed, this tidal wave slipped by just as Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School had envisioned--a"quiet revolution." A revolution that could not be resisted by force.

Where can we see other evidence of the teachings of the Frankfurt School in our culture today One example is the public school system. William Kilpatrick observes that our public schools have shifted to a moral "value neutral" mode of teaching over the past three decades. For students, this has meant wholesale confusion about moral values: learning to question values they have scarcely acquired, unlearning values taught at home, and concluding that questions of right and wrong are always subjective and relative.

The new educational techniques, implemented under a "values clarification" methodology, incorporated overtones of "sensitivity training." Emphasis is placed on one's feelings, which borders on in invasion of privacy. For example, a Virginia mother of a third-grade daughter tells us that her daughter was "...told to write in a journal five things she couldn't tell her mother." Teaching more resembled psychotherapy than education. This method of teaching in our public schools has created a generation of moral illiterates; students who know their own feelings but don't know their culture.

Parents of public schooled children seldom know that such methods exist. Quite often this is a matter of deliberate policy. In one community, when a teacher asked what she should do if parents objected to the new "values clarification" program, she was told by a seminar leader, "You call it 'life skills'and you do it anyway." In other communities, parents have been forced to sue under the Freedom of Information Act in order to find out what materials were being used in their children's classes. Professor Sidney Simon, who created the "Values clarification" method, boasted that as a young teacher at Temple University he "...always bootlegged the values stuff under other titles: I was assigned to teach Social Studies in the elementary school, and I taught values clarification. I was assigned Current Trends in American Education, and I taught my trend." Indeed, the cultural Marxists have taken charge of our public schools.

Note also that the "sensitivity" training techniques used in our public schools over the past 30 years, and which are now employed by the U.S. military to educate the troops about "sexual harassment, " were developed in 1943 by Frankfurt School protégé' Abragam Maslow. Maslow is the author of The Art of Facilitation, a manual used during such "sensitivity training. Teachers were thereby indoctrinated not to teach but to facilitate. They were to become amateur group therapists. The classroom became the center of self-examination, therapeutic circles where children (and later on,military personnel) talked about their own subjective feelings. This technique was designed to convince children that they were the sole authority in their own lives.

Parental authority, as well as authoritative teaching, were to be denied because, according to Critical Theory, the young might become authoritarian characters or worse. Through applied mass psychology, parents were to be convinced that children should make their own decisions so they could be molded into the new American child (Hillary Clinton's It Takes a Village to Raise a Child) who would have none of the attributes that social psychologists consider negative. Techniques for overcoming resistance 9by the child, the parent, or both), developed mainly in the field of individual psychotherapy, were improved and adapted for use with groups and even for use on a mass scale.

It is important to realize that this movement, cultural Marxism, exists, understand where it came from, and what its objectives were and are--the complete destruction of Western Civilization in America. That is, these cultural Marxists aimed to destroy, slowly but surely from the bottom up, the entire fabric of American Civilization.

By the end of World War II, almost all the original Frankfurt School members had become American citizens. This opened a new English-speaking audience for focusing on American forms of authoritarianism. With this shift in subject matter came a subtle change at the core of the Institute's work. In America, authoritarianism appeared in different forms than its European counterpart. Instead of terror or coercion, conformity was enforced by more gentle means. According to Martin Jay, "Perhaps the most effective of these were to be found in the cultural field. American mass culture thus became one of the central concerns of the Frankfurt School in the 1940s."

The Frankfurt School had devised the concept of designating the opponents of the Marxist social revolution as "authoritarian characters." According to available accounts: "..there was a meeting of American scholars at a conference on religious and racial prejudice in 1944. Over the next five years, a Frankfurt School team under the direction of Max Horkheimer conducted in depth social and psychological profiles of Americans under a project entitled 'Studies of Prejudice.' One of the results was a book entitled The Authoritarian Personality by Theodor Adorno, et al, that summarized on of the largest public opinion surveys ever undertaken in the United States. It was published in 1950, and conformed to the original Critical Theory in every respect. As a document that testified to the belief system of the Frankfurt School revolutionaries, it was essentially anti-God, anti -Christian, anti-family, anti-nationalist, anti-patriot, anti-conservative, anti-hereditarian, anti-ethnocentric, anti-masculine, anti-tradition, and anti-morality. All of these are elements inherent in Critical Theory.

Since the 1940s subtle changes appeared in the Frankfurt School's descriptions of their work.
For example, the opposite of the "authoritarian personality" was no longer the "revolutionary," as it had been in previous studies aimed at Europeans. In America, it was now the "democratic" who opposed the "authoritarian personality." Thus, their language matched more closely the liberal "...New Deal rather than Marxist or radical... "language. Education for tolerance of rather than praxis for revolutionary change was the ostensible goal of their research. They were cleverly merging their language with the mainstream of liberal left thought in America while maintaining their cultural Marxist objectives.

Toleration had never been an end in itself for the Frankfurt School. Yet the non-authoritarian (utopian) personality, insofar as it was defined, was posited as a person with a non-dogmatic tolerance for diversity. This thought is dominant in today's elite Boomer generation, the New Totalitarians.

Culture Marxism, as reached by the Frankfurt School alumni in the U.S. and as followed by the Boomer elite--The New Totalitarians-- laid the foundation for and spawned the widely popular, long term nationwide campaign against "prejudice," bigotry" and "discrimination. These were the precursors to the less popular, and inherently destructive concepts of "affirmative action," "multiculturalism" and "diversity." Recognize the terms? You can't escape them if you watch national television or read the mainstream press in the U.S. today. They derive from an Institute study of "anti-Semitism" (they meant anti-Communism) and discrimination" (they meant the success of capitalism) during the 1940s. That "study" inserted the language of "discrimination," "civil rights," "women's rights" and other minority "rights" into the mainstream of American culture.

According to Raymond V. Raehn:
"Critical Theory as applied mass psychology has led to the radical deconstruction of gender [sic] in the American culture. Following Critical Theory, the distinction between masculinity and femininity will disappear. The traditional roles of mothers and fathers are to be dissolved so that patriarchy will be ended. Children are not to be raised according to their biological differences, but should be free to move in and out of existing genders and gender roles according to their own preferences. This reflects the Frankfurt School rationale for the disintegration of the traditional family."

Thus one of the basic tenets of Critical Theory was the necessity to break down the contemporary family. The Institute scholars preached that "...Even a partial breakdown of parental authority in the family might tend to increase the readiness of coming generation to accept social change. "The "generation gap of the 1960s and the "gender gap" of the 1970s are two aspects of the attempt by the elite Boomers (taking a page out of cultural Marxism) to transform American culture into their Marxist "utopia."

THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN CULTURE ENVISIONED BY THE CULTURAL MARXISTS IS BASED ON MATRIARCHAL THEORY. THAT IS, THEY PROPOSE TRANSFORMING AMERICA INTO A FEMALE-DOMINATED CULTURE.

This is a direct throwback to Wilhelm Reich, a Frankfurt School member who considered matriarchal theory in psychoanalytic terms. In 1933, he wrote in The Mass Psychology of Fascism that matriarchy was the only genuine family type of "natural society."
Eric Fromm,another charter member of the Institute, was also one of the most active advocates of matriarchal theory. Fromm was especially taken with the idea that all love and altruistic feelings were ultimately derived from the maternal love necessitated by the extended period of human pregnancy and postnatal care. "Masculinity and femininity were not reflections of 'essential' sexual differences, as the romantics had thought. They were derived instead from differences in life functions, which were in part socially determined. This filthy dogma was the precedent for today's radical feminist pronouncements which appear in nearly every major newspaper and TV program, including television news-casts. For these current day nihilists, male and female roles result from cultural indoctrination in America--an indoctrination carried out by the male patriarchy to the detriment of women. Nature plays no role in this matter.

Rachn reveals that Irving Kristol's description of womanly traits closely resemble Eric Fromm's justification for a matriarchal society, which became an integral part of the social revolutionary process promoted by the cultural Marxists. Raehn builds on the work of Martin Jan to reveal the psycho-dynamics of the social revolutionary process of cultural Marxism in our day. He builds a framework for simplifying and understanding this process as follows:

This inversion of the structure of authority really means an inversion of the moral order and so leads to disorder,chaos, and social disintegration.

Racn states that the reference to higher order and lower order is necessary in this framework because the social revolutionary ideology is one in which women and children are viewed as those of the oppressed lower order while white males are viewed as the oppressor higher order. This flows from the original view of the utopian social revolutionaries themselves as those of the "oppressed" lower order who thereafter identify with those of the lower order of all kinds. This reflects the underlying impulse of the Frankfurt School and their Critical Theory, which in their eyes justifies the social revolution.

Indeed, cultural Marxists have, in the 1990s, rendered with Boomer elite radical feminism a throwback to the dangerous Transcendentals of the 1820s to form a caldron of discontent (via Critical Theory--destructive criticism in our nation that has the potential to destroy America Civilization.

For example; the combat arms of the U.S. military are the last bastions of male domination in American culture. The matter of women-in-combat is not really about sex equity or equal opportunity as is commonly argued. These are only the given reasons. The real reason is to create the psychic condition of submission by men in America to the will of the social revolutionaries by depriving higher order males of any authority to set and enforce standards. This functions as a means of transferring authority to the social revolutionaries themselves so they might gain the position of power and influence of the higher order and thereby achieve the exchange that is the aim of the social revolutionary process. Radical feminist and cultural Marxist revolutionaries are placing women on top in order to set the stage for the destruction of American Civilization.

Indeed, Critical Theory as mass psychology came to be applied against America on a vast scale and with great success. The Authoritarian Personality served to ignite a massive concerted effort by the Marxist revolutionaries (in the guise of social psychologists) to eliminate "prejudice" in American life--and later "discrimination." This concerted effort led to the psychic criminalization of prejudice and discrimination in precisely the same way Karl Marx criminalization of discrimination by a series of Federal Laws and Judicial decisions.

The final straw in this process was affirmative action. Tom Chittum, a Vietnam Warveteran and spokesman for a growing number of middle-class Americans (especially those who have seen their manufacturing jobs exported to foreign shores via NAFTA and other free-trade mechanisms), tells us that "The racist euphemism for [the] systematic dismantling of the rights of [white] English-speaking Europeans {in America} is affirmative action. Indeed, affirmative action has separated white American males of European descent from minorities and women in ways that could lead to violence in America's future--a violence fed by the same factors that led to the chaotic disintegration of the former Yugoslavia.

Only recently have whites awakened and began to fight back against this tyranny. California's successful referendum via proposition 209 to outlaw preferences based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin is an example of this awakening."

The next stage in this applied mass psychology was the psychic criminalization of what the Marxist social revolutionaries called "racism," "sexism" and "anti-Semitism." The intended criminals, of course, were white males. This was a logical outcome of Critical Theory which also inspired Betty Friedan''s feminist movement with her book, The feminine Mystique. Obviously, she understood the revolutionary intent of Herbert Marcuse who proclaimed it on the campuses of American colleges and universities in the mid 1960s. Friedan quotes Eric Fromm in her seminal screed, which initiated the modern feminist movement. Indeed, radical feminism was spawned by cultural Marxism during the 1960s and 1970s.

In terms of destruction and disintegration, the "change agents" and social revolutionaries who absorbed Critical Theory led them to declare their intent to restructure America. As they proclaim, this means their activities have been directed toward the disintegration of the traditional white male power structure. As anyone with eyes to view present-day television and notion pictures can confirm, this has been largely achieved. In other words,Critical Theory, as applied mass psychology, brought forth a "quiet" psychic revolution that facilitated an actual physical revolution that has become visible everywhere in the United States of America.

This "quiet revolution" resulted in a mass conversion of the American people by dialectic stages of operant conditioning by words such as "prejudice," "discrimination." "bigotry," "racism," "sexism" and "anti-Semitism." This was designed to instill guilt, pity, shame, fear, anger and hatred in the American psyche so that no one would dare oppose the social revolution without being exposed to uncontrollable rage, intimidation, and terror--this latter being a reflection of Karl Marx's dictum that "the nation must be taught to be terrified of itself..."

This is the psychic "ironcage" in which the American male has been placed by the confluence of two dangerous ideologies--radical feminism and cultural Marxism.

It was the destructive criticism of the primary elements of American culture that inspired the 1960s counter-culture revolution. As the name implies, this false "spiritual awakening" by the idealist Boomers in their coming -of-age years was an effort to transform the prevailing culture into an inverted or opposite kink of culture that is a necessary prelude to social revolution. Now that these Boomer elites are in positions of power they are completing their work of destroying every institution that has been built up over 200 years of American history. Their aim is to destroy any vestige of Western Civilization in American culture.

As Richard Bernstein made clear in his book on multiculturalism, "...the Maarxist revolutionary process for the past several decades in America has centered on race and sex warfare rather than class class warfare" as in earlier times. As the social revolutionaries readily proclaim, their purpose is to destroy the hegemony of the white male power structure. In order to accomplish this, all barriers to the insertion of women and minorities into this power structure are to be broken down by all means available. Laws and lawsuits against discrimination serve as some of these means. Intimidation and outright terrorization of white males as oppressive racists and sexists are carried out by the mass media and our universities. These are the psycho-dynamics of the revolutionary process that are designed to render psychic decapitation of anyone who might offer effective opposition.

1996 Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes wrote recently, "This country's Founders recognized three primal values in the Declaration of Independence, and they ranked them properly: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Forbes observes that if the order of these fundamental human rights is switched--putting happiness before liberty or liberty before life--you end up with moral chaos and social anarchy. This very condition is what Judge Robert H. Bork describes as "modern liberalism." He identifies the defining characteristics of this ideology as "...radical egalitarianism' (the equality of outcomes rather than of opportunities) and 'radical individualism' (the drastic reduction of limit to personal gratification)." These traits are the ultimate in pure "pursuit of happiness." This condition is the ultimate goal of the social Marxists of the Frankfurt School--a utopian paradise where they and they alone make the rules.

Judge Bork also identifies radical feminism as "...the most destructive and fanatical..." element of the modern liberalism. He further describes radical feminism as "...totalitarian in spirit. This is a refined way of saying that the forces of radical feminism and cultural Marxism have joined with Boomer elite's to set the stage for the destruction of American Civilization.

Most Americans do not yet realize that they are being led by social revolutionaries who think in terms of the destruction of the existing social order. The New Totalitarians' "quiet revolution," begun with the counter culture revolution of their youth, is nearly complete. It was based on the intellectual foundation of the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School. Its completion depends on keeping the American male in his psychic "iron cage."

The confluence of radical feminism and cultural Marxism-- the most destructive ideologies known to mankind--have combined within the span of a single generation to impose this yoke on the white American male. It remains to be seen whether or not he will continue his "voluntary submission" to an American matriarchy--the precursor to a state of complete anarchy.

A BENCHMARK EXPOSE' OF A SECRET ORDER WORKING TO DESTROY AMERICA'S HETEROSEXUAL CULTURE.

WHO PLACED AMERICAN MEN IN A PSYCHIC "IRON CAGE"

The Thread of culture MarxismBy Dr. Gerald L. Atkinson

The Thread of culture Marxism
By Dr. Gerald L. Atkinson