Since Bush Jr. the world came to see more politicians who found it a sport to throw mud to others.
It became increasingly common to spread falsehoods and misrepresent others. Especially in America it was seen that for example, 90% of what appeared on the sites of the Tea Party was incorrect. Today we see that much injustice is being done to others, by blackening them and/or by spreading falsehoods or deception about them without giving them the opportunity to respond. If people try to expose untruth or prevarication, they will be silenced or their reply or reaction will simply not be published. Right to answer is apparently something that no longer seems to exist today. Though, the right of correction or the right to defend oneself against public criticism in the same venue where it was published is part of a democratic process. Today, however, we see how many want to silence that democratic right and send more and more disinformation about others, especially opponents, into the world.
The internet with its ability to send blogs and messages on social media, such as Tweeter and Facebook, made it possible to spread falsehoods very quickly and over a very large domain.
It is really getting time that we should focus our efforts and resources more to no longer simply allow misinformation to be given about conditions in the world as well as about certain movements in the world. We should equip our youth against the nihilistic, cynical disinformation that seeks to undermine our society’s support for Peace, Security, and Prosperity.
On the net we find an example of presumably a conservative North American (?) who so-called wants to help organisations and executives to exploit opportunities and thrive in the face of rapid change, though that change he is presenting has nothing to do with the reality and is build on disinformation, which is a very dangerous game he is playing.
But here and there he recognises also some falsehoods that are going around in his surroundings. Like the saying that the United States/West/NATO caused the crisis in Ukraine by wanting to expand to Russia’s borders, thus threatening the latter. He agrees that the reason NATO has expanded since the end of the Cold War is that Russia’s neighbours felt, and continue to feel, threatened by Russian aggression and expansion.
Conception
But concerning that threat, he, like lots of American citizens thinks, communism is the originator of evil. He does not want to see that lots of people see the danger of our consumeristcapitalistworld and how many big companies make a lot of money “on the hood of poorer people”.
“The spiritual state of our time is characterized by curious paradoxes. On the one hand, modern man is a naive realist — even a dogmatic absolutist — the material, sensual data being to him unquestionable reality. If he speaks of reality in terms of indisputable certainty, he points to the material world, to the world of space, filled with matter. But it so happens that modern science has shattered and riddled this compact conception of the world in such a way that modern man, without giving up his naive conception of reality, has at the same time become a sceptic…. Reverence for the quantum is, so to speak, the new version of the golden calf.”
{Emil Brunner, Christianity and Civilization, 1. (London: Nisbet and Co., 1947), p. 31.}
In 2022, the majority of the population has no interest in the spiritual but is largely concerned with collecting as much money and goods as possible for themselves, without wondering what the impact will be on nature or on people who ensure that the raw materials to delivering those goods are provided.
Castles and fortresses
Richard Martin might be aware that there is a cowboy mentality and cultural machismo of riskiness which can catch up to people. In some articles, he gives the impression he too knows how successful businesses act “like the army in the castle or the walled city“. However, he points also to what can happen underground. He seems to understand that this ongoing competition in our capitalist world, like a besieging army, is tunnelling to undermine other companies’ competitive walls.
Though Mr Martin seems to be aware of all the pollution such international companies create, he is against those people who complain about it and dare to come on the streets to protest. He even sees such environmentalactivists as a threat and even calls them left-wing anarchists. He even wants his readers to believe those left-wing people rely heavily on mob action and direct, violent action.
Apparently, he finds the many protestmovements of those who are committed to the earth and fellow man, completely irresponsible and damaging the community, while those ‘left’ demonstrators come up to protect the community and nature.
He also seems to confuse the clear view communists have, about how to treat nature and the living being in it, with individuals or groups that come to adopt increasingly radical views in opposition to a political, social, or religious status quo.
He says both, the far right and far left, reject or manipulate electoral politics, though socialists and communists reject and disdain manipulation and spreading fake news. For those left-wing people unmasking politicians who want to manipulate the citizens, this can not be seen as undermining democracy or manipulating elections. Just the opposite, left-wing people (incl. communists) shall try to bring out the truth and clarify what someone wishes to do or what they stand for. Clarity and honesty are one of the basic rules of communism.
Having no clue
When looking at Mr Martin’s articles “What Fascism Really Is” and “The Far Left and Far Right Are Twins” we clearly can see that he has no clue what communism really entails or that he (perhaps) wants to spread lies about it like Trumpists do all the time. Of course, it could also be that Richard Martin very consciously or intentionally wants to cause harm to groups that want to spread Marxist thought and/or have other opinions than himself. But, of course, that would indicate that he is not at all open to dissent from his thought and, therefore, makes a democratic process impossible.
We would advise him and his followers to read some more pamphlets and basic articles on left-wing ideas, Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, and communism in general. Then he could be a bit more knowledgeable on the subject and not tell such absurdities about leftists.
Internationality versus nationalism
We have no idea how he can come to think that
The far (alt) right and the far (radical) left are pretty much identical in worldview, strategy, and tactics. {The Far Left and Far Right Are Twins}
In essence, right-wing theories are totally opposite to left-wing proclamations. Also, those on the right favour only a certain group of people of a certain race, while those on the left proclaim that everyone in the world should be equal. For Mr Martin
The main distinction is ideological. The far left is internationalist and anti nationalist, while the far right is nationalistic and anti internationalist. Other than that, they are mostly twins. {The Far Left and Far Right Are Twins}
Too bad that man does not see that globalisation is coming anyway and that is why it is so important to take into account the international framework. We cannot continue to live on our little island but have to see everything in a broader and international context.
Mr Martin seems to miss the fact that Left-wing politics describes the range of political ideologies that support and seek to achieve social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy. Either he is blind or deaf to see or hear how communists try to convince others to be there for others and to help to build up our society. Left-wing politics typically involve a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished.
It is true that communists are against traditional hierarchies but wrong to say that right-wing people would also be so. In all the right-wing groups we clearly see that they are following a certain person, nearly elevating him or even getting to worship the leader, something one does not want to happen in left-wing circles. So fascists and communists are not “both authoritarian” like Mr Martin wants his readers to believe.
Real communists are against authoritarian regimes or systems of government that have no turnover in the power of the executive and who do not afford their citizens’ civil liberties or political rights. On the contrary, leftist groups want to democratically give everyone an equal voice and allow them to participate in society. It is precisely that cooperation in a society that is given such importance in communism. Everyone has to do their bit and have respect for everyone around them.
Mr Martin seems to forget that it is in other systems, in particular in fascism that one gets a form of government that is not democratic.
On one aspect he is contradicting himself, saying left-wing people would
and thus he indicates that we would go up against each other, though a little bit later he argues that those leftist’s ideas would be personalist ideologies that elevate their leaders to heroic or divine status. That last point is just something where the present communist parties warn so much about the danger of such venerationof people. They point out the horrible situations we got in the past where certain communists fought against other communists or killed those who did not go their way.
The most notable authoritarian regimes of the 20th century were characterised by what one could call charismatic leaders, a mass party, and a powerful secret police force. Most often once the great talker came to power he made sure that his opponents were eliminated and thus themselves act as dictators. As fine examples, we can see great political figures like Hitler and Mussolini, but also less competent and more transparent figures whose words were, or are, full of lies, like Trump and Bolsonaro.
Regimes that used state institutions to brainwash and completely control their populations were categorised as totalitarian. Totalitarian regimes aimed to instil in their citizens an undying loyalty to the regime and its leader. In such regimes children were indoctrinated from a young age, learning about the heroics of their leaders and the superiority of the regime’s guiding ideology. No dissent was tolerated, and all of the opposition was either exiled, killed, or imprisoned. Political trust was low, as citizens were encouraged to spy on each other and to serve as informants for the regime.
We agree that in several communist countries there also could be found differences between classes or groups of people. In the Soviet Union and eastern bloc countries, sportsmen and dancers were given special status with multiple benefits. Such advancement of party members and special privileged, such as sportsmen and artists, is against the basic principles of Marxism. To distance themselves from such wrongdoing, some communist groups are now proposing their thinking as Communism 2.0.
Having to go through historical phases
“Marxism argues that humankind will inevitably take a path to communism, but it will be achieved through historical phases.”
said Xi Jingping.
The world shall not be changed at once or just in one generation. We have to be patient and gradually work and strive to come to a community in which everybody shall feel one with each other going for the same goal, of having a peaceful fulfilling, satisfying life.
Concerning China
“Comrade Deng Xiaoping said socialism is the primary stage of communism and China is at the primary stage of socialism, in other words, at the undeveloped stage.”
Karl Marx argued that capitalism’s contradictions prompt socialist revolutions and eventually lead to communism. Ironically, revolutions occurred in countries where capitalism was undeveloped, and experiments to create communist societies ended in failure.
Martin wrongly states
Similarly to socialism, fascism sees independent centres of social solidarity, cooperation, and community as threats to this top-down cohesion. Both are inherently collectivist in nature, {What Fascism Really Is}
It is not to get independent centres of social solidarity, cooperation, and community, but to have cooperation between all social groups and communities, not at all seeing such groups as threats.
For communists, though, it is important that everyone, from the cleaning ladies to factory owners, cooperates to make social life as good as possible and economically successful, where there will be no slavery or exploitation of people or nature anywhere.
Logically that socialists and communists would be no capitalists and even be anticapitalists, but fascists generally, are not at all anticapitalists. It is true that those from the left would love to see capitalism eliminated and replaced by a balanced system of accumulation or shared ownership.
We need to move away from the idea of having everything just for ourselves and recognise that in addition to our own property, there can or should be equally good things that can be shared with everyone in the community. A completely different revenue model than pure monetary gain for the individual should be sought.
Socialism advocates public or direct worker ownership, rather than private ownership, and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources, and a society characterised by equal access to resources for all individuals, with an egalitarian method of compensation. There should be the view that everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. We have to get rid of unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from the free-market competition — people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society.
Capitalism is a system that fosters injustice and inequality and creates difficulties among the population through the friction created. We could already witness several financial crises which caused right-wing parties to rise out of the ground.
“Hear the wrath of the people,” Puerta del Sol, Sunday morning, 29 May 2011
Across the Continent, it was easy to see how the crushing social effects of austerity had fatigued and radicalized populations. Protests were taking place in other countries besides Greece and Bulgaria. In Spain, the indignados (the outraged ones) had continued their massive, anti-austerity protests for more than four years. Protests spread in Italy as well. In September 2013, thousands of Poles took to the streets of Warsaw demanding the resignation of the government. Marching under the banner of “Solidarity,” Poles demonstrated against their worsening economy.The anti-austerity indignation fueled popular support for relatively new political parties on the far right. Since the beginning of the Greek anti-austerity riots, a neo-Nazi party called Golden Dawn had been gaining popularity among those Greeks frustrated by the economic situation and aggravated by European Union pressure and intervention. ….
Golden Dawn gangs (with the implicit support of the Greek police) started by targeting Muslims and immigrants from North Africa and the Middle East, but then turned their attentions to Greeks with leftist political sympathies. In September 2013, fifty Golden Dawn activists carrying crow-bars and bats attacked a group of fellow Greeks who were distributing litera-ture in a working-class, immigrant neighborhood in Athens. Nine victims of this attack were sent to the hospital with serious injuries. A few days later, a Golden Dawn activist stabbed to death a left-wing hip-hop artist, sparking new riots. The streets of Greece’s capital were filled with teargas as Greeks protested against both the economic conditions and their fascist spawn.
The far right was making a comeback in Bulgaria as well. The snap elections in May 2013 brought to power a new government, which took office with the support of a nationalist party called Ataka (Attack), characterized in no small part by its harshly negative attitude toward Bulgarians of Turkish or Roma descent. The leader of Ataka threatened peaceful antigovernment pro-testers with “civil war” and had seized upon the political frustration of poor ethnic Bulgarians outside of Sofia. Ataka’s popular support paved the way for other far-right parties, offering similar anti-Turkish and anti-Roma rhetoric. {Prologue Communism 2.0? – The Left Side of History by Kristen Ghodsee}
Recurring frictions to come to an end
If we want to put an end to the recurring frictions caused by inequalities with their attendant protests, we need to ensure that everyone receives fair remuneration and understands the usefulness of his or her role and contribution to society.
One can only live together peacefully if everyone in that society appreciates each other’s opinions, which do not have to be the same, but respectful.
In such a peaceful society, there is no place for lying and therefore those who spread lies must be exposed as soon as possible and there must always be people who continue to see to it that the truth always comes out. In particular, this is the task of (investigative) journalists, historians, and scientists, but also of conscious citizens and militants.
*
Somehow one would expect that a consulting agent that he would try to advise people in an honest way holding to the truth. But it looks like some, like Richard Martin from Alcera Consulting on exploiting change in a turbulent world, is not keeping to the thought one would expect to find on such a blog. In several of his articles, he violates the truth and does not show negative reactions to his articles, because he continues to post his lies freely and can make people believe that he is telling the truth.
A joint effort of several authors who do find that nobody can keep standing at the side and that “Everyone" must care about what is going on in today’s world.
We are a bunch of people who do not mind that somebody has a totally different idea but is willing to share the ideas with others and to be Active and willing to let others understand how "today’s decisions will influence the future”. Therefore we would love to see many others to "Act today".
View more posts
7 thoughts on “How willing are people to stand up for their values and beliefs”
Dear Marcus,
Hello! I have featured and hyperlinked your post here as a display quotation in the twelfth and last section named “Denouement: Democracy, Education, Legislation & Sustainability” of my extensive and analytical post entitled “Misquotation Pandemic and Disinformation Polemic: Mind Pollution by Viral Falsity“, which has been revamped and which you can easily locate from the Home page of my blog.
I do hope the public or readers shall print the sayings in their ears.
I love to repeat your additional writing also here:
The outstanding effects and ramifications of Misquotation Pandemic, Disinformation Polemic and Viral Falsity have become so far-reaching and wide-ranging that they are (im)posing considerable disruptions and existential threats to humanity, as they inject layers of complexity and even intractability to diverse matters pertaining to information literacy, media literacy, sociopolitical impact, sociocultural disturbance, foreign interference, political warfare, information warfare, knowledge security, social integrity, electoral integrity, media integrity and diversity, as well as conflict resolution, civic engagement, democratic resilience, public health, epidemiological response, sustainable living, environmental protection and ecological crisis. All in all, Viral Falsity has become both the recipe and the accelerant for instability, conflict, crisis and degeneracy on a global scale in pandemic proportions, burdening a large number of peoples, institutions and societies with awkward, difficult, complex, dangerous or hazardous situations occasioning gross injustice, perturbation, violence, lawlessness or dehumanization, and resulting in social, legal, political and bureaucratic quagmires, whilst (con)straining both intellectual discourse and civic life.
We would advise him and his followers to read some more pamphlets and basic articles on left-wing ideas, Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, and communism in general. Then he could be a bit more knowledgeable on the subject and not tell such absurdities about leftists.
Karl Marx argued that capitalism’s contradictions prompt socialist revolutions and eventually lead to communism. Ironically, revolutions occurred in countries where capitalism was undeveloped, and experiments to create communist societies ended in failure.
Some View on the World 
Dear Marcus,
Hello! I have featured and hyperlinked your post here as a display quotation in the twelfth and last section named “Denouement: Democracy, Education, Legislation & Sustainability” of my extensive and analytical post entitled “Misquotation Pandemic and Disinformation Polemic: Mind Pollution by Viral Falsity“, which has been revamped and which you can easily locate from the Home page of my blog.
Happy mid-November to you!
Yours sincerely,
SoundEagle
LikeLike
Thank you very much for doing so.
I do hope the public or readers shall print the sayings in their ears.
I love to repeat your additional writing also here:
LikeLiked by 1 person