What If Karl Marx Had Been Black?

Great Moment in History?

by: randall nunn | published: 11 02, 2008

Many in the mainstream media would have us believe that Senator Obama’s election would be a historical moment of great import because he is black. In actuality, he is more white than black and more Arab than black, but this is lost in the media’s attempt to rewrite the facts to suit its propaganda onslaught. But is it a great moment in history if the greatness of the United States is wrecked by a Marxist simply because he is black?

Senator Obama is an activist socialist who has carefully concealed the true nature and depth of his radical political philosophy. Senator Obama’s wife, his spiritual mentor, his associates on boards and his family all share this same socialist political philosophy. If we are honest in our analysis and description of Senator Obama, he is a Marxist. If he manages to get elected, we will all begin to see more clearly the extent of his radicalism.

The followers of Karl Marx are activists who believe that revolutionaries must organize social change. Marx said that “philosophers have only interpreted the world …the point is to change it.” Does this not describe Senator Obama and his associates and his activities with ACORN?

Many Americans have a tendency to get swept up in what they perceive to be great historical movements. The mainstream media packages Senator Obama as a “transfigurational” figure and then mounts a campaign to manufacture public opinion to support the false image it has created. If we do not support the messiah, we are reactionaries standing against the great historical tide.

What the mainstream media has misjudged, however, is the innate intelligence and common sense of the average American voter and the ability of Americans to keep alive free and open political discourse through media such as the Internet and talk radio. Those liberals who understand the power of the Internet and talk radio to blunt the effectiveness of the mainstream media’s unrelenting propaganda want to destroy them through the so-called “fairness doctrine”. The true enemy of individual liberty at this moment is the mainstream media.

The battle for individual liberty and government by the people will continue no matter the outcome of this election. The battle becomes more intense and more critical as we near the time when more Americans receive money from their government than pay taxes to their government. Before the wealth can be “spread around”—in Senator Obama’s words—it first must be taken from those who earned it. When the number of takers exceeds the number of earners, we are all in trouble.

We know now the great misery inflicted upon millions of souls in this world by the false doctrines of Karl Marx. We know of the economic devastation of country after country and the liquidation of millions of human beings in the name of socialism and communism. And yet, there are many who either do not understand, or choose to ignore, the great darkness that descends upon a society in the grip of Marxist ideologies.

So, if we know that Marx’ philosophy inflicts pain on individuals and destroys freedom wherever it has been imposed, does it make it better or more gentle if it is advanced by a black politician who must be elected in order to prove our tolerance and our opportunity to experience a “historical” moment? If Karl Marx had been black, his philosophy would still have been a historical calamity. Why do we think Barack Obama can transform it into something benign?

Randall H. Nunn

add a comment