|
Home
|
Dan Chavez In the Soviet Union Lenin and his successors adhered to a view of history that saw the Communists as the vanguard or leaders of the oppressed classes of society. Workers, peasants and what they termed the lumpenproletariat (comparable to the underclass) were to be directed, guided and mobilized by a Communist elite who, by their superior understanding of social laws, were best suited to be leaders of the other classes. In practice, this led to rule by a power-hungry group of unscrupulous oligarchs who systematically embarked on a program of social engineering that cost the lives of millions.
The small number of people that comprise the upper echelons of the liberal media are motivated by three things. First, to find and exploit topics which in their minds will stimulate enough interest to attract enough viewers to justify advertisers investing money in commercial pitches to this audience. Second, to make sure that the topics covered further or do not go against the values (such as they are) held by the liberal Democratic coalition, of which the liberal media, of course, is the most powerful constituent part. And third, to assuage their own guilt, not by making sacrifices of their own assets and positions, but rather by urging others to make sacrifices of their own to those that the media elites see as their political allies. In the Soviet Union the vanguard of the proletariat (communists) urged members of all classes, particularly those they saw as the exploiting class (the nobility, rich and middle class peasants, clergy and pre-Revolutionary intelligentsia) to make sacrifices on behalf of those the communists claimed had been exploited in the past. In practical terms, what this meant was that the communists did the exhorting and everyone else did the sacrificing. Since they saw themselves as enemies of private property they saw themselves as making common cause with the lumpenproletariat, what in today's term would be called the underclass, who, as they taught, were also enemies of private property and, thus, allies. Since the property owned by the Communists was considered state property, owned by "the people" they felt in no way threatened by the common criminals of the lumpenproletariat, whose acquisitive instincts toward the "private" property of others in no way threatened their position or standard of living, particularly since such property owned by the "people' was well-protected. Broadcast network television, namely the big three (NBC, CBS and ABC), are the main venues through which the values of the liberal media are inculcated in the masses, especially via their news programs that serve to tell viewers which "cause of the day" to be concerned about. With the advent and growth of cable and satellite television the overall percentage of people who partake of the network's viands is shrinking. But among the poor and the lumpenproletariat, viewership of broadcast network television is higher. So what you have is the journalists, editors and owners of these venues using their access to these viewers to not only inculcate values but also condition responses among those they see as political allies. All at no cost to themselves because no matter how much guilt those in network television feel about the advantages and privileges they have, they will be sure that someone else, of their choosing, expiates the guilt that they feel toward their political allies who are not as materially successful as themselves. So, just as the Soviet practitioners of the Vanguard Doctrine used the Marxist concept of class struggle to mobilize those whose behalf they claimed to be acting for, in the same way do we see the elites in the media, especially broadcast network television, using smear tactics, labels, ad hominem attacks and guilt to attack those who do not share their values and to motivate and energize their political allies on the left. One of our major tasks as activists is to destroy the credibility of the liberal media. Since they, especially network television, feel free to castigate their opponents (us) with whatever terms arise in the pottage of what passes for their imagination then why would it not be to our advantage to point out the numerous similarities that exist between the communists and the liberal media? Both in philosophies held and tactics used. History is replete with examples. Let's point them out at every opportunity. Let's turn the tables on them. I want to see them squirm. Read Dan's previous columns:  |
In today's free society the ability of would-be social engineers to manipulate and direct large numbers of people is to a degree limited by the traditions of civil liberty and freedom which have been left to us by previous generations. This is not to say that the Western practitioners of what the Soviets termed the Vanguard Doctrine have not been active and successful, just that they plans have not been able to put their plans into practice without opposition.