Political Correctness Came Out of the Frankfurt School

[annabenedetti]

Are you interested in a dialogue, or does that seem too dangerous in your world?

You're just hooking up a hose to your silo of quotes - do you have a cut-off valve by any chance?

 

[annabenedetti]

"The greatest obstacle to globalism is the individual with his strong
conscience

Okay, so the nun with her strong individualistic conscience, resisting the collectivism of the convent - was that a good thing, or a bad thing?

the result of a patriarchal home

There it is...

with a patriarchal faith.... Our tax dollars wholeheartedly support these heresiarchal
programs today. Our tax dollars are dedicated to pushing and
sustaining their liberal agenda, the dialectical paradigm, into every
American home, via. entertainment, education, work, government, and
even the church. All must participate. The process is not successful
until no one can escape."

Or, you can use your patriarchal individualism and turn off the TV.

"The pathway to "equality," in its full glory, is sodomy...........The
role of the facilitator of 'change' is to prevent any from standing in
the way of sodomy, where 'change' (progress) becomes the way of life.
It is the duty of ministers who facilitate 'change' to prevent any
from inhibiting the agenda of "equality," to guarantee the Sodomizing
of America while deceitfully telling you that that is not their aim,
i.e. as Satan told the woman in the garden, "You will not die." When
you do not reprove, correct, or rebuke unrighteousness, sodomy becomes
the "norm," abomination becomes the way of life."

(Sodomy is politically correct in 2016 political correctness Marxism)

It always comes back to homosexuality, doesn't it?

Collectivism is defined as the practice or principle of giving a group priority over each individual in it. Collectivism is created in a more individualistic oriented society by an authoritarian - fascist nationalism or Marxist internationalism - government, and/or by agents in society who are allowed to assume control over groups. A facilitator of a small group acts as a controller of the group, though he or she may pretend that control is "non-directive," imposing a collectivist or group-think attitude on members of the group.

So where does that leave your small church groups, your boy scouts and youth sports leagues?

PTA? Bowling leagues?

Book clubs?

Homeschool groups?

 

[northwye]

If the user of the dialectic can get his opponent into a quarrel, the opponent may be led to return to the spiritual level of the natural man of I Corinthians 2: 14 and become angry. Though the user of the dialectic may not have won the quarrel, he has won in the sense that he caused - perhaps just momentarily - his target person to regress spiritually into the state of the natural man of I Corinthians 2: 14.

"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29. Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers," Romans 1: 28-29

Debate is from eris, number 2054, "a quarrel, wrangling, contention,debate, strife, variance."

The first definition of eris is a quarrel. Those who like to quarrel are probably in the spiritual state of the natural man of I Corinthians 2: 14.

Debate: "Origin: Middle English: via Old French from Latin dis-
(expressing reversal) + battere 'to fight'"

Quarreling is an accurate English word for eris. Some kinds of
statements invite a quarrel more than other kinds of statements. And
quarreling is an indication of a reprobate mind in Romans 1:28-29. And
a quarrel can go on without people overtly insulting one another by
calling each other bad names or trying to insult one another in more subtle ways.

In I Corinthians 1: 11, Paul says there were contentions among those
in this ekklesia. Romans 2: 8 says "..unto them that are contentious,
but do not obey the truth...indignation and wrath." I Corinthians 11:
16, says "If any man be contentious, we have no such custom." And look
at II Corinthians 12: 20. Here Paul says he fears that when he comes
back to his people at Corinth that he will find them in debates,
envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings,
tumults." The NIV has quarreling for the Greek word eris. This is one
of a few places where the NIV supports a doctrine that some other
recent versions diminish.

Paul uses another Greek word which also carries with it
contentiousness in I Timothy 6: 3-4,
logomachia, "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome
words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine
which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but
doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy,
strife, railings, evil surmisings."

This is an important and interesting text, because what Paul is saying is that those
who get off into doctrines that were not taught by Christ and the
Apostles tend to get into logomachia, or strifes of words." Lets see
what Strong's says about logomachia.

Logomachia is number 3055 in Strong's and is said to mean
"disputations, strife of words." Logomachia might be translated as
"word fights."

The doctrine given in Romans 1: 28-29, Romans 2: 8, I Corinthians 11:
16, II Corinthians 12: 20 and I Timothy 6: 3-4 says that to engage in
contentious quarreling is a trait of the reprobate mind. It is also a
trait of the person in the condition of the natural man of I
Corinthians 2: 14, who cannot discern the things of the spirit.

Now look at Acts 15: 1-2: "And certain men which came down from Judaea
taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the
manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas
had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined
that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to
Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question."

Luke did not use eris or logomachia in Acts 15: 2, which would have
carried a meaning closer to contentiousness than suzetesis.
But Paul and Barnabas did make strong disputation with the
Pharisees who taught that Christians must observe the ceremonial law
of Moses to be saved.

There is a possibility that some of the people here who seem to be defending Marxism are Catholics and are following the present pope, who is saying things that sound like he is a Marxist.

 

[annabenedetti]

In case all that's for me, I have to tell you that if you regress spiritually as a result of this discussion, you'll have to, as an individualistic society of one, take sole responsibility for your behavior.

I'm not looking for a quarrel in the sense that I'm angry or trying to make you angry. I'm genuinely curious - if I wasn't, I wouldn't have spent so much time in this thread.

I really wish you'd answer some of my questions, I'm interested in what you think, how you've processed this information you've soaked in. I understand that to a certain extent, because I did that too once. And then I realized how much I'd been influenced by people who were warning me not to be influenced by... other people.

Going back to the nun - was she an individualist, or was she a collectivist? Which action was correct, staying with the collective in a church I'm pretty sure you don't believe is a legitimate one - or acting as an individualist and thinking for herself outside the Catholic hierarchy, an action which you don't seem to have approved of either? This poses quite the dilemma for you, I'd think.

 

[Crucible]

Are you interested in a dialogue, or does that seem too dangerous in your world?

Come from you, that is absolutely hilarious. The irony meter is spinning.

 

[Interplanner]

Political Correctness, as the manipulation of the people by use of race,
gender and other stereotypes, is more like the Marxism of the
Frankfurt School than the Bolshevism of Lenin and Stalin who did not
follow the "long march through the institutions" of Antonio Gramsci
(1891-1937), but used massive violence from the beginning to overthrow
government.

The political correctness movement reduces the subtle and complex reality of cultures, ideologies, borders, language and people to make all this into a simple matter of race, gender and other stereotypes, used as weapons to change the culture of the West, This process is called predilection
for single orderings. Francis Schaeffer said that many people do not have enough categories of thought. He was talking about this over-simplification process. Clinton B. DeSoto's 1961 concept which he called predilection for single orderings is the idea that many people cannot deal with multiple concepts at once, or a mix of several concepts in a dialectical opposition.

DeSoto did a study, published in 1961, which supported his idea that many people generally have difficulty in understanding and ordering a complex set of ideas, issues or events and tend only to understand and deal with simple one dimensional statements.

The dialectical opposition which is presented by Political Correctness - a method of attitude and belief change used by Transformational Marxism - ignores a number of factors in order to carry out the manipulation of the attitudes, beliefs and behavior of masses of people.

The concept of predilection for single orderings and its support in empirical data shows that many people are unable to deal with a complex set of oppositions. For example, Black Slavery Is Good versus All Slavery is Bad is a single ordering, that most people can understand.

But when you create a dialectic that is more complex than such a single ordering many people cannot deal with that.

For example, the Old South played an important role in winning the Revolutionary War and in setting up the Constitutional Republic. Old South leaders played a large role in formulating the nation's political ideology. Transformational Marxism is opposed to that American political ideology - especially seen in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was created under a guy of the Old South, James Madison.

The complex dialectic which political correctness creates using racism in the Old South - but does not acknowledge - mixes racism with the creation of an American political ideology which gives the individual rights that Transformational Marxism opposes. This is the deception of political correctness.

Transformational Marxism, as a form of Marxism, has no absolute morals, and so Transformational Marxism has no moral reason to try to change people's prejudice toward Blacks, women, homosexuals, lesbians, etc. As a form of Marxism it wants to overthrow the American Constitutional system of checks and balances and especially to do away with the Bill of Rights, giving individuals rights in what the Marxists want to create, a collectivist society, which is already under way in the screaming politically correct "warriors." The Marxists want to get rid of the First and Second Amendments. Remember that the First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Not only did James Madison, who, with his Committee in the House, create the Bill of Rights, own Black slaves, and so did George Washington, Thomas Jefferson James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk - and Ulysses S. Grant.

Jefferson opposed slavery, but kept his slaves as part of his household, and many historians say, his family. Ulysses S. Grant owned one Black slave and controlled a number of others who were owned by his wife. The complexity of racism in the U.S. includes the fact that four states which remained in the Union during the 1861-65 war continued to allow slavery during that war - Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware. And that politically correct Union Army which invaded the South, destroying property and killing civilians, after the war became politically incorrect when it began killing Indians in the states of the Great Planes.

Thanks for the comments here on predilection to single categories. PCness is fundamentalist. I have included this in some of my materials.

In DELUGE OF SUSPICIONS, the racism driving the welcoming of uniformitarianism and evolution is exposed.

 

[annabenedetti]

The political correctness movement reduces the subtle and complex reality of cultures, ideologies, borders, language and people to make all this into a simple matter of race, gender and other stereotypes, used as weapons to change the culture of the West, This process is called predilection
for single orderings. Francis Schaeffer said that many people do not have enough categories of thought. He was talking about this over-simplification process. Clinton B. DeSoto's 1961 concept which he called predilection for single orderings is the idea that many people cannot deal with multiple concepts at once, or a mix of several concepts in a dialectical opposition.

DeSoto did a study, published in 1961, which supported his idea that many people generally have difficulty in understanding and ordering a complex set of ideas, issues or events and tend only to understand and deal with simple one dimensional statements.

The dialectical opposition which is presented by Political Correctness - a method of attitude and belief change used by Transformational Marxism - ignores a number of factors in order to carry out the manipulation of the attitudes, beliefs and behavior of masses of people.

The concept of predilection for single orderings and its support in empirical data shows that many people are unable to deal with a complex set of oppositions. For example, Black Slavery Is Good versus All Slavery is Bad is a single ordering, that most people can understand.

But when you create a dialectic that is more complex than such a single ordering many people cannot deal with that.

For example, the Old South played an important role in winning the Revolutionary War and in setting up the Constitutional Republic. Old South leaders played a large role in formulating the nation's political ideology. Transformational Marxism is opposed to that American political ideology - especially seen in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was created under a guy of the Old South, James Madison.

The complex dialectic which political correctness creates using racism in the Old South - but does not acknowledge - mixes racism with the creation of an American political ideology which gives the individual rights that Transformational Marxism opposes. This is the deception of political correctness.

Thanks for the comments here on predilection to single categories. PCness is fundamentalist. I have included this in some of my materials.

In DELUGE OF SUSPICIONS, the racism driving the welcoming of uniformitarianism and evolution is exposed.

I've downloaded and read De Soto's "The Predilection for Single Orderings."

Please relate your apparent belief that application of the study results absolves the Old South of its heritage of racism. I'll use my copy of the study to follow along. Thanks in advance.