Here's What I Heard

In the wake of the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Washington has, predictably, been thrown into political chaos.  We are just 6 weeks out from a Presidential election the Democrats are convinced they can win, while the Republicans find themselves in a moment of enormous opportunity and advantage.  The possibility is very real that the Republican Senate will have occasion to confirm the nominee of the Republican President to the highest court in the land, effectively and significantly altering the political composition of the bench for decades to come.

 

Such a reality would seriously hinder the current political agenda of an increasingly radical Democratic Party, and affect the future of critical issues such as Obamacare, abortion-on-demand, gender fluidity, the definitions of marriage and family, gun ownership, open borders and choice in education, to name just a few.  What is at stake here is the very nature and fabric of our American society.  What is at stake is the very definition of what future generations will understand it means to be “American.”

 

The Democrats’ (rather disingenuous) contention, of course, is that it is inappropriate for a sitting President - no, for THIS sitting President - to nominate, and for a Senate controlled by the opposing party to appoint, a Supreme Court Justice this close to an election.  Of course, they imply, WE holier-than-thou Dems would NEVER do such a thing!  Right.  And if you believe that, have I got such a (Green New) deal for you! 

 

Such is the uproar that, over the weekend, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer issued both a call to arms and a threat.  First, he urged, “We (Democrats) HAVE to get the majority.”  Implication:  During the upcoming election, it is more important than ever for we Dems to win back both houses.  Then, provided we can forestall a vote on President Trump’s nominee, we will have the opportunity to defeat her (or, more unlikely, him).  Second, he said, should the Republicans proceed with such an evil and unfair tactic as nominating and confirming a replacement for RBG prior to the election, AND if the Dems successfully win the majority in both houses, “Everything is on the table.”

 

Implication:  Having a majority in both houses, we can then move to restructure the Court, so that there will be twelve Justices rather than nine, and we will load the three additive seats with Justices who will interpret or even confirm a rewrite of the US Constitution according to our “progressive” agenda and vision for the future of this country.  “You want to play hardball?” he is suggesting, “We can and will stuff that ball down your collective throats.”

 

So what did I hear Senator Schumer say?  Schumer actually threatened the American electorate.  How?  Well, it was the electorate who voted Trump into office; it was the electorate who voted in a Republican majority in the Senate.  And the consensus of the electorate was that they voted as they did largely to see a conservative President nominate, and a conservative Senate confirm, conservative Supreme Court Justices.  Now that RBG has gone to her eternal reward, to them it matters not that she did so close to November 3rd; the electorate’s wishes remain that the President for whom they voted would carry out his Constitutional privilege - and responsibility - to name her replacement while he is in office.

 

Should these elected officials carry out the wishes of those who elected them, and should the Republicans lose the Executive and Legislative Branches in the upcoming election, Schumer says, “Boy will you be sorry!”  That was a threat.  And it was a threat aimed not only at his political opponents, but at the populace who vote, and at their children, and grandchildren for generations to come.  Personally, I don’t take to being threatened by my elected officials.  And I will make my reply known in the polling booth in just six weeks’ time.

Where Have We Seen This Before?

Observing the behavior of the “demonstrators” the past three months in multiple U.S. cities, tactics have been in evidence that rang certain bells for me.  Clearly there is more going on than reaction to heavy-handed, racially-targeted policing.  Whether or not these “demonstrations” began as legitimate expressions of indignation in response to perceptions of injustice, they have been hijacked by others with another agenda.  And this kind of opportunism reminded me of methods used by Bolsheviks during the Revolution of 1917.  So I went back to one of the books in my library to refresh my memory.

In Revolution in Russia, (Viking Press, 1967), Edward Pearlstien quotes extensively from reports published in the then-extant New York Herald and the New York Tribune to chronicle the progress of the Russian revolution.  It has been chilling reading, in light of current events.  Here is some of what I re-discovered (This is rather a long one, folks, so grab a cup of Joe):

In Spring, 1917, a Socialist Revolution in Russia had been progressing, more or less, for 18 years, having begun with student riots in 1899, which had in turn precipitated labor strikes and workers’ riots which began in 1905.  There had been increasing criticism of the Russian upper classes, most notably of the Emperor himself, Tsar Nicholas II, which culminated in his abdication in 1917, at the height of the “Great War,” commonly known as World War I.  

There followed several years of chaos, as disparate groups vied for power.  Most notable among these groups was the Bolshevik socialist movement, led by V.I. Lenin.  Lenin, a student of the philosophies of Karl Marx, was convinced the road to power lay in harnessing the dissatisfaction of the working classes by planting within them the hope of a brighter future through social egalitarianism, or socialism.  He ceaselessly agitated workers, soldiers and students, attempting to convince them of their victimhood and of the glories of socialism.

Though the aristocratic “bourgeoisie,” or educated upper classes, attempted to introduce democratic reforms in the form of a Provisional Government, Lenin would have none of it.  He considered the democratic freedoms offered by the Provisional Government to be simply throwing a bone to the “oppressed masses,” and as such represented a “halfway revolution,” not the complete overthrow of capitalism he envisioned and championed, not only in Russia, but throughout Europe and the world.

In a speech at the railway station in Petrograd (formerly St. Petersburg) on April 14, 1917, Lenin said, 

“The piratical imperialist war (WW1) is the beginning of civil war throughout Europe….The hour is not far distant when…the peoples will turn their arms against                    their own capitalist exploiters…The worldwide socialist revolution has already dawned…Any day now the whole of European capitalism may crash…Long live the worldwide socialist revolution!”

Lenin made his meaning clear the next day at a meeting of Bolsheviks: “Without the overthrow of capital is is impossible to conclude the war with a real democratic, non-oppressive peace.” He outlined his demands and those of the Bolsheviks for the “new Russia”:

“Abolition of the police, the army, the bureaucracy.

Confiscation of all private lands.

Nationalization of all lands in the country.

Immediate merger of all the banks (and the wealth they controlled) in the country into one general national bank, over which the [Bolsheviks] would have control.

[The socialist government] would be placed in control of all social production and distribution of goods.”

In the end, the Bolsheviks had their way, and replaced the police with brutal “enforcers” of socialist dogma, called the Cheka - forerunner of the KGB.  Riots and civil war continued for 3 years, but the Bolsheviks - who rebranded themselves Communists - gained control through ruthless and murderous suppression of all opponents.  The result?

  

“By 1920, Petrograd and much of Russia lay in ruins.”  A report by a Professor Zeidler, who was formerly head of the Petrograd Red Cross, but then a refugee in Finland, recorded these observations: 

“Death stalks on every side waiting for winter to aid in the grim work of mowing down the silent, hungry, sick and dying thousands.  With streets and houses choked with filth that is already spreading spotted and intermittent typhus, the cold weather will finish the task with pneumonia and abdominal typhus.

“The fuel situation was never so bad.  Wooden houses have been torn down for fuel.  The material is distributed equally among the population, but during the nights the more energetic citizens steal the quota of wood from the others.

“The woodyards have been nationalized.  One of these has been given up entirely to the manufacture of 30,000 coffins monthly.  But even this number is insufficient.  People have not time to bury the dead, and the bodies take their turn, waiting several days.

“Only one important tramway [streetcar railway] line is in operation, and that runs to a suburb.  Attempts to repair the streets, which are full of holes owing to bursting water pipes, have failed because the wood blocks for pavement have been stolen for fuel.  Lighting is allowed only two half hours each day.  Kerosene costs 450 rubles a pound. [At the time the average worker earned perhaps 100 rubles per month.]  There are no candles.  Most homes are in darkness.  There is no means of transporting things by waterway, because the barges were long since demolished for fuel.  The railway transportation is devoted almost exclusively to the distribution of flour.

“Only 200 people are permitted to leave Petrograd daily by passenger train.  Workmen receive half a pound of bread daily, and sometimes other food is given.  The prices of foodstuffs continue to rise to incredible heights.  Many products have almost completely disappeared from the markets.

“The mortality has reached a startling rate with the the lack of food and insanitary conditions of houses and streets.  Fat has left the majority of the population long ago.  At present, the muscular tissue is consumed.  The faces of people have taken on a waxlike color.  In order to fill their stomachs with something they drink different substitutes for tea and coffee, or quantities of plain water, resulting in puffiness and dropsy [water retention], which change the expression of the face so that old acquaintances are unrecognizable.

“The decay of property is aided not only by the colossal prices of materials and wages - the slightest repair work costs not under 100,000 rubles [which all goes to the State, as a means of “leveling” wealth] - but also to the fact that house porters are abolished, partly as a bourgeois system and partly because the porters are needed for wood cutting.  At present houses are looked after by beggars and committees composed of indigent Communists.

“Indescribable dirt and filth is on every side within the houses.  When plumbing gets out of order it remains unrepaired.  Whole houses become filthy from top to bottom and it becomes impossible to live in them  These houses are then barred, and tenants move into other houses, which are neglected in the same manner.

“There is no fuel, no hot water or baths, no janitor, doorkeeper or servants for cleaning years, streets, buildings or for the removal of garbage.  Th government appointed a special sanitary commission with sweeping authority, but the commission accomplished nothing.  The commission is housed in a building where the heating plant is out of order and the water system and toilets are not running.

“Petrograd is facing a dreadful specter of epidemics.  Thousands are already dying every month of spotted, abdominal and intermittent typhus, dysentery, Spanish influenza, small pox, pulmonary diseases, hunger and exhaustion.

“The hospitals are overflowing with dropsy victims, mostly women, elderly men and children.

“The Minister of Health, apparently realizing the gravity of the situation, recently ordered the mobilization of all physicians, regardless of age, to combat epidemic diseases.  The infection of soldiers with spotted and intermittent typhus necessitated the reopening of three of the largest military hospitals for exclusive use of the army.  The moral breakdown of the population is well illustrated in the hospitals, where there is no discipline and no care of patients.

“Patients are taken in the hospitals without a bath.  If they want to be warm while in bed awaiting an operation they must bring their own blankets and furs with them.  Both the patients and the lower medical personnel are engaged in stealing warm coverings.  The medical attendants rob the sick and steal the property of the hospitals.  Each physician has 150 to 200 patients.

“In the military hospitals where there are surgical instruments operations are performed in unheated rooms, and almost all the operations result in complications such as pneumonia and ulcers [infections].  Medical supplies are very scarce. There are only two thermometers for 150 patients.”

Edward Pearlstien comments:

“By the end of 1919 almost every industry and every utility of any importance had been nationalized, from the giant Petrograd metal works to bakeries and public baths.  In many instances old managers and engineers were removed and more often than not were replaced by individuals or committees lacking the technical and organizational experience necessary to run complicated modern industries.  It was presumed, in accordance with Marxian theory that the workers, used to the division of labor and the cooperation it required, would be able to determine their own conditions of work rationally and to organize production and distribution along socialist lines.  The result was that instead of efficiency and socialist dedication to a common goal, waste, ineptitude, lackadaisicalness, and corruption were the rule.”

And owing to the war, in which millions perished, and to rampant disease and to the wholesale murder of the upper classes, the “intelligentsia,” and anyone else who resisted Communist doctrine and dictates, there was a huge shortage of manpower.  This was exacerbated by massive starvation due to food shortages during the years immediately following, 1921-1922, when an estimated 5 million people died of malnutrition and attendant diseases.  Ten years later another famine (some believe intentionally created by megalomaniac Joseph Stalin) resulted in yet another 3-7 million deaths.

All in all, socialism was a disaster for Russia, which continues to this day to struggle with the corrupting effects of 70 years of attempts to make it work.  Socialism fails to take into account basic human nature, which is essentially self-interested rather than altruistic and self-denying.  Only in Christianity do we find the teaching and ability to live selflessly in favor of the success and well-being of others.  Lacking this, all attempts to “socialize” and “equalize” in favor of the “collective good” will always produce repression, demotivation and hopelessness.  Attempts at actualizing Marxist theory throughout the world have demonstrated this, producing results similar to those experienced by Russia and the Soviet Union.

These lessons of history, unfortunately, are not presently taught in the majority of our public schools, and are roundly ignored or downplayed by colleges and universities who would “cancel” them in favor of a revisionist version of “history” (if history is taught at all). But the lessons are still there for anyone who would search for them, and should give serious pause to those who would be so foolish as to believe themselves somehow “intelligent” enough to make Marxism work here in the United States, when it has failed so miserably everywhere else.  These lessons should also serve to truly “wake up” those who are currently making such an attempt through fomenting anarchy in the inner cities of our nation, as well those who turn a blind eye for personal, political gain.