Politics and the Church – The Church and the Liberal / Progressive / Communist Threat [Part 74]

As Christians we wish and strive for a time when we can all live together in peace.  We know that in Heaven all strife and disorder will be a thing of the past.  Unfortunately, in today’s world here on earth that looks like a distant, unattainable goal.  Of course, we know the reason for such discord.  Satan and his minions are agents of hate, violence, evil, and discord.  These are basically the same goals of some of the efforts going on in our world.  Many are knowingly or unknowingly part of this effort to destroy peace and create a tyranny of greed, power, control, and broken human relationships.  While I write about the threat of liberalism, progressivism, and communism, I truly believe that the first two ‘ism’s’ are sometimes exercised with the best of intentions but failing in the final results.  The only ‘ism’ that I write about that I believe is fully dedicated to destroying humanity, without care for life or the Word of God is Communism.  Still, we have those who will try to defend Communism to the very end regardless of the facts.  This week we will start taking a look at questions many of us might have and look at the arguments that some use to justify the evil system designed to destroy the world God meant it to be.  Communism is not the first system to make this effort, but it seems to have a foothold that peace-loving peoples will have to be willing to stand against…with the help of God.  These questions go back to the origins of Communism.

>   Do you think there is a possibility that the democracies and the Soviets can somehow co-exist?  ‘The existence of the Soviet Republic side by side with imperialist states for a long time is unthinkable.  One or other must triumph in the end.  And before that end supervenes, a series of frightful collisions between the Soviet Republic and the bourgeois states will be inevitable.” (V.I. Lenin, Report of the Central Committee at the 8th Party Congress, 1919).  This attitude is nothing new.  The proletariat in the Soviet Union harbors no illusions as to the possibility of a durable peace with the imperialists.  “The proletariat knows that the imperialist attack against the Soviet Union is inevitable; that in the process of a proletarian world revolution wars between proletarian and bourgeois states, wars for emancipation of the world from capitalism, will necessarily and inevitably arise. Therefore, the primary duty of the proletariat, as the fighters for socialism, is to make all necessary political, economic, and military preparations for these wars, to strengthen its Red Army…that mighty weapon of the proletariat…and to train the masses of the toilers in the art of war.” (Thesis of the Sixth World Conference of the Communist International, International Press Correspondence, November 28, 1926, p. 1590).

>   Why does Communist leadership not go ahead and prove that communism will work in its own country of development before trying to force it upon other nations?  “Final victory can be achieved only on an international scale, and only by the combined efforts of the workers of all countries.”  (Joseph Stalin, Leninism, Volume I, p.170).  “This means that the serious assistance of the international proletariat is a force without which the problem of the final victory of socialism in one country cannot be solved”. (Joseph Stalin’s letter to Ivanov, p.9).

>   If a person is in favor of cordial relations between nations is that person to be considered an ‘Internationalist’?  “At present the only determining criterion…is: Are you for or against the USSR, the motherland of the world proletariat?  An internationalist is not one who verbally recognizes international solidarity or sympathizes with it.  A real internationalist is one who brings his sympathy and recognition up to the point of practical and maximum help to the USSR in support and defense of the USSR by every means and in every possible form”.  (P.E. Vyshinsky, “Communism and the Motherland”, in Voprosi Filosofi, Problems of Philosophy, Vol. 2, 1948).

>   During World War II the Communist leaders said they wanted to be friends with the United States.  Why did this hope not continue? “The fact that the Soviet Union and the greatly shaken capitalist countries showed themselves to be in one powerful camp, raged against the Fascist aggressors (during World War II), showed that the struggle of the two systems within the democratic camp was temporarily alleviated, suspended, but this of course, does not mean the end of the struggle.”  (Varga, World Economy and World Politics, June 1949, p.11).  “Our collaboration with capitalism during the war which has recently ended, by no means signifies that we shall prolong our alliance with it in the future.  On the contrary, the capitalist forces constitute our natural enemy despite the fact that they helped us to defeat their most dangerous representative.  It may happen that we shall again decide to make use of their aid, but always with the sole aim of accelerating their final ruin.” (Marshall Tito as reported by the Continental News Service, November 8, 1946, and quoted in Communist Threat to Canada, Ottawa, 1947, pp. 10-11).

>   In other words, the Communists pretended to be our friends merely as a matter of expediency.  Why would it not be to our mutual advantage to continue being friends? “War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable.”  (Dimitry Z. Manuilsky as stated in a lecture to the Lenin School on Political Warfare in Moscow, 1931.)  So, peace between the two political philosophies is just not possible.  

>   Then why does the Communist world try to maintain peaceful relations with the West?  “We cannot forget the saying of Lenin to the effect that a great deal…depends on whether we succeed in delaying war with the capitalist countries…until proletarian revolution ripens in Europe or until colonial revolutions come to a head, or finally, until the capitalists fight among themselves over the division of the colonies.  Therefore, the maintenance of peaceful relations with capitalist countries is an obligatory task for us.”  (Joseph Stalin, “Speech to the 15th Congress of the Soviet”, Selected Works, Vol. X, pp. 95-96; also pp. 100-101).

>   With this being the situation, should we expect this ‘inevitable’ conflict soon or far in the distant future?

To tie one’s hands beforehand, openly to tell the enemy, who is at present better armed than we are, whether and when we will fight him, is stupidity and not revolutionariness.  To accept battle at a time when it is obviously advantageous to the enemy and not to us is a crime; and those political leaders of the revolutionary class who are unable to ‘tack, to maneuver, to compromise’ in order to avoid an obviously disadvantageous battle, are good for nothing.” (V.I. Lenin, “Left-wing Communism, An Infantile Disorder”, Selected Works, Vol. X, pp.95-96; also pp. 100-101).  

>   Does this explain why Communists continue building up a tremendous war machine while proclaiming the desire for peace?  Do they sincerely think the West would not like peace and be able to disarm?  “There is a glaring contradiction between the imperialists’ policy of piling up armaments and their hypocritical talk about peace.  There is no such contradiction, however, between the Soviet Government’s preparation for defense and for revolutionary war and a consistent peace policy.  Revolutionary war of the proletarian dictatorship is but a continuation of a revolutionary peace policy by other means.” (Thesis of the Sixth World Congress of the Communist International, International Press Correspondence, November 28, 1928, p. 1590)

>   Would not a so-called revolutionary peace policy by ‘other means’ simply be a demand for unconditional surrender under threat of extermination?  Why do the Communists perpetuate the myth of peaceful coexistence when the West is openly considered an enemy?  “Today, of course, we are not strong enough to attack…To win we shall need the element of surprise.  The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep.  So, we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record.  There will be electrifying overtures and unheard-of concessions.  The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will jump at another chance to be friends.  As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fists.” (Stated in a lecture by Dimitry Z. Manuilsky at the Lenin School on Political Warfare in Moscow, 1931). 

     Next week we will continue this evaluation of Communism ever being compatible with a peaceful. democratic lifestyle.  Areas that will be considered are illegal operations, revolutionary violence, war and peace, the Communist International, diplomatic intrigue, ethics and morals, the Bible, religion, individual freedom and civil liberties, education, and labor.  Communism has and will try to imbed itself in all phases of life in an effort to gain power and control.  If we are not aware of these efforts and ready to take a stand, the Communists will come out the winners and politics as we know them today will become a thing of the past…as frustrating as they are at times.

-Bob Munsey

“Weakness invites the wolves” Senator John Kennedy (R-LA)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s