- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

Bolshevik Revolution Then, Cultural Revolution Now

That’s an old propaganda poster from Italy’s Christian Democratic party. It reads: “Mother! Save your children from Bolshevism! Vote Christian Democrat.”

Here’s a current version now making the rounds on Italian conservative social media. “Gender” is the Anglicism that Italians use to represent “gender ideology,” their term for the LGBT program advocated by the Left. Really interesting to see how revolutionary Marxism has become defined in contemporary Italy not with Marxist politics per se, but with left-wing attempts to abolish the traditional family and gender roles.

 

Advertisement
37 Comments (Open | Close)

37 Comments To "Bolshevik Revolution Then, Cultural Revolution Now"

#1 Comment By RealAlan On February 9, 2019 @ 4:57 pm

Obvious difference between the two: there is no equivalent in the second poster to the admonition “Vote Christian Democrat”. No way out is suggested.

Perhaps that is because gender theory and its accompanying maladies are the consequences of liberalism. Their most active exponents may be called “cultural Marxists” or “cultural socialists” or whatever. But the developments themselves are the results of liberalism, which, per Patrick Deneen is like the water fish swim in; we hardly notice its existence, and there is no escape from it.

#2 Comment By Dale On February 9, 2019 @ 6:24 pm

Italians bear watching as they seem to have some fight in ‘em.

#3 Comment By Furor On February 9, 2019 @ 6:31 pm

This is one of the dumbest reactions I regularly see from people of so called right wing affiliations. This is obviously a false equivalence which only creates a false consciousness among the people.

Bolshevism was a universalist movement that appealed to socio-economic differences, something to which everybody could relate, because socio-economic status is a frequent subject of reflection among masses of people.

So the message of bolsheviks resonated among people dozens of times more than the actual support and size of the movement initially. This was really an example of how a small group of people, who can propagate a universalist message, can gain strength and change the entire society.

Whereas with the whole LGBT stuff, no matter how often gays are shown in TV, how many times they march on the streets of cities, how often boundaries between sexes are criticized and blurred, 95% of the people will continue to identify as male/female and heterosexual. Which is why such thing as “homopropaganda” doesn’t really exist.

The LGBT message is way more particularistic and it can’t be made universalistic, because there’s simply no way in which the issue of sexual minorities can be extended to resonate with the experiences of other people. If people in some way refer to LGBT issues, then it’s forced, fashionable and artificial, whereas bolshevism brought up the most important existential problems of the people.

The threat from the LGBT movement is not direct, but indirect, that is, it gives the state pretexts to persecute through administrative means the rest of the 95% of non-LGBT people. The potential threat was already signalized by this Obama officer who said that if you dislike LGBTism, then your tax relief will be taken away, and that’s a real, indirect consequence of LGBTism.

Such posters certainly don’t contribute to convincing argumentation because people will have difficulties imagining how LGBT marches affect them in any way. Divorces, abortions, heterosexual relations will continue to be way more important for the shape of society than LGBT issues.

#4 Comment By Madeleine On February 9, 2019 @ 6:39 pm

Gender ideology isn’t opposed from the right alone; In South America, LGBT issues as well as legalization of abortion are thought by some to be of a piece, and an attempt by the state to undermine parental rights. This is particularly true in places such as Argentina and Chile, where there is still a popular memory of right-wing totalitarian states that “disappeared” people and also practiced irregular adoptions, the seizure and rehoming of children belonging to political dissidents.

These issues are creating strange bedfellows. Latin American Christians favorable to liberation theology in Latin America are often economically liberal but socially conservative. In the past their primary concern was neoliberal capitalism and corruption. So while formerly they would have rebuked the church for its underemphasis on social justice and overemphasis on sexual sin, now they feel that there is a feminist and gay push to marginalize Christianity and undermine the traditional family. I was talking about this just yesterday with a friend in Argentina who is a teacher and the wife of an evangelical pastor. She is afraid that the church and traditional Christians will be persecuted in our time. She’s stunned to hear herself referred to as a bigot; this is a woman who has worked among the poorest of indigenous poor and children with special needs.

Then there are conservatives, some of whom are vulgar and cruel in their treatment of LGBT, arguing that there is an agenda to homosexualize their countries. Frankly they’re playing into the hands of the radical left. (By the way, is radical left even a useful term anymore? I mean, you have Coca-Cola printing and handing out gay pride shirts.)

Another group, Con Mis Hijos No Te Metas (Don’t Mess with My Children) started out in Peru as a group opposing gender ideology in schools, but has spread throughout Latin America and become a catch-all for people who oppose globalization or have been dispossessed by it, people against the invasive and corrupt state as well as U. S. policy unfavorable to those nations, and pro-life Christians, among others:

[1]

As in the United States, the press and the upper classes often treat these people as deplorables. And as regards anti-American sentiment, when Planned Parenthood, for instance, sets up a base camp in a country where abortion is illegal and hires former government ministers to lobby for them, citizens there don’t see PP as a stateless organization. They see it as an outworking of American interest in their resources, corruption of their politicians/elite and American desire to keep their population stable or decreasing. While the links to the American state may be tenuous, exaggerated or outright false, published U. S. policy is to work toward decreased population in these countries, and the U. S. has meddled in their domestic policies. The connection isn’t totally fabricated:

[2]

#5 Comment By MichaelGC On February 9, 2019 @ 7:32 pm

Furor says on February 9, 2019 at 6:31 pm

Such posters certainly don’t contribute to convincing argumentation because people will have difficulties imagining how LGBT marches affect them in any way. Divorces, abortions, heterosexual relations will continue to be way more important for the shape of society than LGBT issues.

It’s not the LGBT marches that people worry about, it’s when the LGBT ideology is in the halls of power and seeks to dominate, as when the Obama administration went large with its Dear Colleague Letter on Transgender Students, notifying schools that they must open up restrooms and locker rooms on the basis of gender identity or lose federal funding. If you happened to be a parent with a daughter in school that would be pretty important. Even though the letter was stopped by an injunction and then rescinded by the Trump administration, many school districts voluntarily adopted the policies of the Letter. That is not good enough for the LGBT ideologues, though, because unisex restrooms and locker rooms are no good at all unless they are mandatory. If or when the Democrats ever come back into power, they will pick up the Letter where it left off and pursue it with a vengeance.

#6 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On February 9, 2019 @ 8:20 pm

Mama! Bring back that Red Banner to save us from the Gender rainbow!

#7 Comment By anori On February 9, 2019 @ 8:45 pm

As Furor notes above…
The conservative notion that things like “Will and Grace” were insidious propaganda designed to make the majority accept gay marriage is, frankly, BS. The people who actually made the show noted that the vast majority of the fans (straight women, of course) believed that Will and Grace would eventually end up together. No doubt that might have happened in the days of the closet, but the whole point is that it’s not a solution.The rather mild suggestion that gay men should not be forced to engage in straight marriage is still, somehow, viewed by conservatives as a threat to Western civilization.

#8 Comment By Turmarion On February 9, 2019 @ 10:44 pm

Well, if we’re going to talk about Bolsheviks and rainbows, how about this? 😉

#9 Comment By RR On February 9, 2019 @ 10:52 pm

In the 1950s, Marxists argued that homosexuality was a product of “bourgeois decadence” that would disappear once capitalism was vanquished. Considering how major corporations favor the LGBT agenda these days, Marxists may have been right to have connected “bourgeois decadence” to homosexuality. But they were definitely wrong about vanquishing capitalism. And yes, what passed for the left today certainly isn’t what it use to be.

#10 Comment By Eric Mader On February 9, 2019 @ 10:55 pm

I have my hopes for Italy. And for a few other European nations besides. Many of us see the current outrageous push and confidence of the Rainbow Cult as a plus. Their very arrogance is beginning to snap people awake.

Our new identity politics left is overplaying its hand on almost every front.

#11 Comment By Ben H On February 10, 2019 @ 12:14 am

The attack on the family is an integral part of Marxism, as can be seen in the Marx/Engels document “Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State” (written by Engels based on Marx’s notes).

The idea is that marriage and family is akin to class conflict. Marriage is the capitalist man exploiting the proletarian woman. So they planned to get women into the workplace, to destroy the family and bring about a utopia of serial monogamy based on transient emotional passions.

[3]

#12 Comment By Some Guy On February 10, 2019 @ 1:40 am

Since the two movements are so similar presumably the most powerful bloc in society, the wealthy and the big corporations were on the same side both times … right?

Or if they supported one movement and opposed another, that difference must reflect some difference between the two movements, right?

#13 Comment By Giuseppe Scalas On February 10, 2019 @ 3:19 am

While in the US Marxism never had much foothold, in Italy a big part of the intellectual élite used to be Marxist and the Country was home to the largest Communist party in the West.
After 1989, most of those people switched from Marxism to Cultural Marxism.
That’s why the connection, which in the US may not be apparent since it originates from obscure Marxist strongholds in academia, is very obvious in Italy.

#14 Comment By JonF On February 10, 2019 @ 6:56 am

Re: The potential threat was already signalized by this Obama officer who said that if you dislike LGBTism, then your tax relief will be taken away, and that’s a real, indirect consequence of LGBTism.

This is plain…weird. First off it needs to be sourced and verified. But secondly, what tax relief? The Trump tax cuts? Then what’s an “Obama official” got to do with it? Also, how would that even work? And I very much doubt tax breaks grounded in ideology would be constitutional.

Re: Divorces, abortions, heterosexual relations will continue to be way more important for the shape of society than LGBT issues.

This however is exactly right.

#15 Comment By Léa On February 10, 2019 @ 9:14 am

The mortal sin of the left: talking about the right without having the foggiest idea about what it truly stands for (probably not bigotry, xenophobia, sexism and so on). The mortal sin of the right: talking about the left without having the foggiest idea about what it truly stands for. Modern identity politics, for instance, are by no means related to Marxism in any shape or form. Identity Politics were actually pushed by the CIA in post-war Europe and the US as a way to fight Marxism. Please check “Who Paid the Piper?” by Frances Stonor Saunders and “The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America” by Hugh Wilford, both extremely serious and documented books about the Cultural Cold War and the push for, and subsequent triumph of the New, defanged and deranged Left wich rules over today’s US Democratic Party and nearly all the “left-wing” European parties.

Two major countries, among other lesser ones, are shaped by Marxism: Today’s Russia, owing to its Soviet history which is still very much alive (they’ve only added a dose of liberal economics and lots of religion to the mix, but even Putin, who was brought up in Soviet Russia, will tell you that Communism and Christianity pretty much say the same things), and of course China. Both of these countries are conservative and harbour no “social justic warriors”. QED.
[4]

#16 Comment By Philly guy On February 10, 2019 @ 9:28 am

It’s always interesting when your opponent says you are overplaying your hand.It means you have shaken their confidence and they are sceered.

#17 Comment By MikeCA On February 10, 2019 @ 11:21 am

I’d be curious to see what James C. has to say about this as he lives in Italy. LGBT as the most pressing,most serious problem that Italians face? It’s an easy target but even if Italy awoke tomorrow to find every LGBT person had left the country the nation would still be in its malaise.

#18 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On February 10, 2019 @ 2:37 pm

After 1989, most of those people switched from Marxism to Cultural Marxism.

Details please. Giuseppe, did you see the deservingly not well remembered movie “Blown Away” about a wealthy communist yacht owner whose wife is stranded with a common sailor (also a communist) on a deserted island? I can well believe that people like the wealthy communist (yes, there were some) would have drifted to “cultural” issues. So much easier than trying to figure out how I have all this money and don’t pay the crew on my yacht a living wage but I’m a communist. However, the CPI had an actual working class base, and I have trouble believing that those demographics (even the most militantly atheist) are all into “cultural Marxism.” More likely, they’re voting Five Stars or Pirate Party. Or sitting at home on election day.

There is a story abot an Italian anarchist who moved to the USA, where he named his daughters Athee and Liberta. But when angry with the children, he was known to say “Athee, per Jesus Cristo I beat you up.” Real life doesn’t fit into neat little cubbyholes.

#19 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 10, 2019 @ 6:54 pm

However, the CPI had an actual working class base, and I have trouble believing that those demographics (even the most militantly atheist) are all into “cultural Marxism.” More likely, they’re voting Five Stars or Pirate Party. Or sitting at home on election day.

I’m not aware of that much direct tracking of former communist voters and their voting patterns today, but there’s a fair amount of indirect evidence that former communists tend to vote for ethnic nationalist parties and / or for nonpolitical strongmen, not for “Cultural Marxist” ones. Consider the Czech Republic for example (which is the one Warsaw Pact country where Communism historically the largest base of popularity: they *won* the 1948 election outright in the Czech lands, and consistently got 15% of the vote after democratization, right up until last year). The Communists lost about half of the vote share last year, but they lost it almost entirely to the ethnic nationalist SPD party and to the centrist populist strongman Babis. There’s almost no overlap between districts where the Communists did well and districts where the Social Democrats and Pirates did well.

Same is true in France, where the National Front appears to have picked up the areas that used to vote Communist back in the day.

It’s a mistake, in general, to conflate “atheistic” or “nonreligious” with “culturally liberal”.

The mortal sin of the left: talking about the right without having the foggiest idea about what it truly stands for (probably not bigotry, xenophobia, sexism and so on). The mortal sin of the right: talking about the left without having the foggiest idea about what it truly stands for.

+1000! There’s a gulf of mutual incomprehension which often makes these conversations very difficult.

And yes, in practice the Warsaw Pact regimes were in some regards quite hostile to modern liberal ideas (they had tightly closed borders, for example, and in practice were quite respectful of national and ethnic identities). This is one reason I find the concept of “Cultural Marxism” so silly, it’s kind of as if you took Christianity, drained it of the core doctrines about the Incarnation, the Resurrection, the atonement and the future life, and then called it “cultural Christianity”, or maybe “modernized Christianity”. There are people who have done that, many of them, but I doubt Rod (or myself) would consider any of them to be faithfully embodying genuine Christian doctrine.

#20 Comment By Harve On February 10, 2019 @ 8:28 pm

MikeCA says:

“LGBT as the most pressing,most serious problem that Italians face?”

Good point! After all, it’s not like populist movements have no experience in picking convenient scapegoats. It seems the theme predates the Christian Democrats. Jews, Masons, Communists, whoever, whatever.

[5]

Am I the only one to notice the fascist flavor of the two posters?

I’d think twice before hitching my wagon to European populist movements. They are experts with floating signifiers.

“This resistance across Europe should not be understood merely as a continuation of previous forms of (conservative) opposition to the human rights pertaining to intimate (Plummer, 2003) and sexual citizenship (Richardson, 2000) policy debates; they are new manifestations of resistance, shaped by new forms of organisation, new types of mobilisation and new discourses that seek to address wider audiences and not only traditional circles of conservative groups.”

[6]

#21 Comment By MC On February 10, 2019 @ 9:54 pm

This poster got me thinking of something slightly off-topic: what happened to political posters? Obviously radio and then tv had an impact in their decline, but it occurred to me that the obvious problem is, where would you put them? There’s no public square or anything similar for people going out in public to see political art/ propaganda. The best comparison we have today is memes on the internet, but that carries the glaring problem that the dominant platforms like Facebook and Twitter are privately owned, so if those companies don’t like it for economic or political reasons, they can just ban them and you reach no one.

#22 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On February 10, 2019 @ 10:08 pm

Circa 1990, as the Warsaw Pact was collapsing, the Communist Party of Hungary voted to dissolve, and form a new Social Democratic Party. After the dissolution, out of 1.1 million card carrying party members, 100,000 actually enrolled in the new Social Democratic Party. Another 200,000 formed a new Communist Party. The remaining 800,000 obviously were the votes that carried the day to dissolve the party. My guess has always been that they were civil servants who had to join the party to be hired or to keep their jobs.

#23 Comment By Fran Macadam On February 11, 2019 @ 4:07 am

” Putin, who was brought up in Soviet Russia, will tell you that Communism and Christianity pretty much say the same things”

You assert this without the least iota of truth.

In Russia, as promoted by Putin, the greatest classic of anti-communist literature, Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s “The Gulag Archipelago,” is now compulsory reading in all high schools. In light of this, and in light of Mr. Putin’s admiration for the Christian Solzhenitsyn, let’s consider it fake news that Putin is communist or that Russia, unlike the Soviet Union, is a totalitarian empire.

#24 Comment By Giuseppe Scalas On February 11, 2019 @ 5:44 am

Siarlys

Of course I’m talking about the cadres. Most of the working class base of the party turned to the Northern League or, lately, to the Five Stars Movement.

Another interesting fact. Some of the readers may know that in the early Nineties the Christian Democrat party collapsed under corruption charges and the disappearance of the Communist threat. A good deal of the Christian Democrat Left joined the ranks of the PD.
Nowadays the PD is the reference party of the Pro-Francis, liberal-leaning Italian CCB.

At the very beginning, a minority of the former Christian Democrats opposed the pro-LGBT and anti-life laws sponsored by the ex-Communist wing of the PD. Some of them quite vocally.
But soon, they were crushed and had to leave the party.

Those Christian Democrats who supported Marxist or Socialist ideas were the easiest to convert to “Cultural Marxism”.

#25 Comment By Giuseppe Scalas On February 11, 2019 @ 5:46 am

Hector

I think Cultural Marxism is best understood as a heresy of Marxism, just as Gnosticism is a heresy of Christianity.

Both cannot be understood without reference to their respective orthodoxies, but of course they are something different.

#26 Comment By JonF On February 11, 2019 @ 6:28 am

Re: …and sexual citizenship

Why does that sound like the name of a porn flick, maybe involving naughty doings in a voting booth?

#27 Comment By James C. On February 11, 2019 @ 7:06 am

I’d be curious to see what James C. has to say about this as he lives in Italy. LGBT as the most pressing,most serious problem that Italians face? It’s an easy target but even if Italy awoke tomorrow to find every LGBT person had left the country the nation would still be in its malaise.

Mike, it certainly isn’t the most pressing problem in Italy. It’s an issue because the Italian left is obsessed with pushing this stuff. It’s the trendy thing now internationally, the sine qua none of being a ‘progressive’ in the West, so they push it.

The PD (Italy’s center-left party) even ran an ad before last year’s election that depicted a ‘normal’ Italian family (mom, dad, two teenagers) in the car discussing the election, all agreeing how great the PD is for having brought in homosexual unions! This, in the face of an economic downturn worse than the 1930s, crushing EU-imposed austerity, and a biblical and extremely costly level of illegal immigration from Africa.

It was comical. That and the push by leftists to bring in ‘gender’ ideology in schools and relax restrictions on abortion and euthanasia and surrogacy. Nobody else wants this stuff. And it only works for the cosmopolitan urban elite. Which is much of what’s left of the PD’s constituency. They collapsed in the March 2018 election and are now a marginal force in Italian politics.

This week, the PD has been displaying French flags online and outside PD-controlled city halls to show their solidarity with that Rothschild banker running France, who is engaged in a dispute with the populist Italian government. I kid you not. Not exactly your grandfather’s worker’s party, eh?

Yesterday’s regional election in Abruzzo gave the center-right coalition 48%. The League, which didn’t even contest the last election (being the Northern League!), got 28%, the most by far of any party.

But the PD still thinks pushing identity politics and mass illegal immigration and more power for Brussels bureaucrats is a winning political program. Like I said, comical.

#28 Comment By Rob G On February 11, 2019 @ 7:51 am

~~The conservative notion that things like “Will and Grace” were insidious propaganda designed to make the majority accept gay marriage is, frankly, BS.~~

It doesn’t have to be “insidious propaganda” for it to have achieved the desired effect.

#29 Comment By Ted On February 11, 2019 @ 9:24 am

James C.: thanks for that extremely interesting and informative dispatch from the front lines.

The PD is the immediate successor to the PCI, right? The latter was pretty toothless when I lived there, in the ’70s, but then they had been outflanked by the Brigate. Berlinguer was supposed to be such sweet thunder because he “stood up” to Brezhnev. Didn’t stop the dough coming from Moscow, however. That was the most they could say for themselves, that and they weren’t burning anything down. The Socialists cratered when Craxi had to go on the lam, of course. Sigh.

#30 Comment By James C. On February 11, 2019 @ 10:08 am

Ted, yes it is the successor. Not that you’d notice, except for the cultural Marxism. The League/Five Star Government this year is fighting Brussels-imposed austerity to shore up the health system and safety net, and they’ve brought in a new ‘citizens income’ for the poor and unemployed and their families, of which there are many millions. They also beefed up worker’s rights and restored pensions that the PD technocrats stripped away in recent years (too expensive, they said. But they happily had many billions of euros available to bring in and support the hundreds of thousands of young male arrivals from notorious war zones like Nigeria, Gambia, Mali, Senegal and Tunisia…)

[7]

Guess who fiercely opposed all this? The PD, of course. Who is on the right or the left now? It’s become a meaningless term.

I would love to see something like this happen in the US: a socially conservative but economically progressive party.

#31 Comment By craig On February 11, 2019 @ 10:51 am

JonF says: “Re: The potential threat was already signalized by this Obama officer who said that if you dislike LGBTism, then your tax relief will be taken away, and that’s a real, indirect consequence of LGBTism.

This is plain…weird. First off it needs to be sourced and verified.”

RD is obviously referencing the (Obama administration) Solicitor General’s oral argument in Obergefell, from [8]:

JUSTICE ALITO: Well, in the Bob Jones case, the Court held that a college was not entitled to tax­ exempt status if it opposed interracial marriage or interracial dating. So would the same apply to a university or a college if it opposed same­ sex marriage?
GENERAL VERRILLI: You know, I ­­ I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics, but it’s certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is going to be an issue.

#32 Comment By MikeCA On February 11, 2019 @ 3:43 pm

Thanks for your on the ground observations,James. My Italian friends are socially liberal and broadly supportive of LGBT rights(they’re against surrogacy but I think they’re against it for everyone) and my impression from them is that the right is using LGBT issues as a distraction.
Because European countries have multiparty systems it’s hard sometimes to attach a label or accurate attribution to someone’s political leanings. I look at the U.K. and how Brexit has exposed sharp divisions in both the Tories and Labour that can no longer be papered over with soothing words. So many feel they have no political home regardless of continent. Quite worrying.

#33 Comment By Ted On February 11, 2019 @ 5:17 pm

James C.: “Ted, yes [the PD] is the successor [to the Italian Communist Party]. Not that you’d notice…”

The thing is you couldn’t much notice back then either. The PCI was desperate to dissociate itself from the Red Brigades, though I suspect their left wing remained in some kind of touch with the crazies. In fact the latter, le Brigate, shot a Communist journalist (I remember because my pal M. and I wrote a wacky song parody of the event in the newsroom–don’t worry, he survived). The party put up a good show of “eurocommunism”–a buzzword of the day coined, I believe, by that profile in courage, Santiago Carrillo–but they still toed Moscow’s line, especially in knee-jerk anti-Americanism. The typical PCI stalwart was indistinguishable in most particulars from, say, an American Democrat academic or professional, though they did have a real measure of union support. The real weirdos went to the Radicali, figures of fun even in Scalfari’s la Repubblica. Are the Radicals still in business? If not I imagine most of them wound up with the PD.

The point is not so much that the PCI wasn’t in Moscow’s pocket–for all Berlinguer’s bluster they very much were, after all, the Comintern paid the bills–but that they were no more than social democrats with a (very powerful and sinister) foreign sponsor. The rump of that party is still in the PD, I imagine, along with the Radicals, and whatever was left of the socialists after Craxi had to take a powder.

Such great, interesting information! Thanks.

#34 Comment By James C. On February 11, 2019 @ 8:05 pm

My Italian friends are socially liberal and broadly supportive of LGBT rights(they’re against surrogacy but I think they’re against it for everyone) and my impression from them is that the right is using LGBT issues as a distraction.

The impetus to change the status quo on this stuff is coming from the Italian left, who are upset that Italy is ‘behind’ other countries in Europe on this. It’s the PD that made it a campaign issue when there are huge economic and other problems to face. It’s a PD senator, Monica Cirinnà, who sponsored the Cirinnà Law establishing homosexual unions (or marriages, as La Stampa, La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera call them), who is going to PD events wearing a tee-shirt emblazoned BETTER A F*GGOT THAN A FASCIST.

#35 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On February 11, 2019 @ 9:04 pm

It’s a PD senator, Monica Cirinnà, who sponsored the Cirinnà Law establishing homosexual unions (or marriages, as La Stampa, La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera call them), who is going to PD events wearing a tee-shirt emblazoned BETTER A F*GGOT THAN A FASCIST.

Ernst Rohm called, he wants his SA back.

The point is not so much that the PCI wasn’t in Moscow’s pocket–for all Berlinguer’s bluster they very much were, after all, the Comintern paid the bills.

The Comintern was dissolved in 1943. Even the post-war antirevisionism campaign couldn’t put it back together again.

Who is on the right or the left now? It’s become a meaningless term.

James C’s account of events on the ground warms my socialist heart. The PD seems to have followed the path of the British Labor Party: “The workers flag is deepest pink, its not as red as some folks think…”

#36 Comment By Ted On February 12, 2019 @ 8:17 am

Siarlys Jenkins says: “The Comintern was dissolved in 1943. Even the post-war antirevisionism campaign couldn’t put it back together again.”

Right. It merged with The Homintern (that’s an Audenism). Which latter is very much among us (vide supra).

#37 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On February 12, 2019 @ 12:10 pm

Right. It merged with The Homintern (that’s an Audenism). Which latter is very much among us (vide supra).

Don’t confuse comedy with history. That’s what got us Al Franken thinking he could be a United States Senator.