What's behind "hope and change"

An article posted over at Pajamas Media called “A U.S. President, Raised on KGB Propaganda” shows how Marxism is a big part of Obama’s worldview, and indeed that of most liberal Democrats. Original article can be found here.

The important fact about modern-day anti-Americanism is that it spreads almost exclusively among impressionable cultural elites who are most exposed to ideological clichés delivered through media and educational channels.

The education system is naturally the main source for indoctrinating the next generation with poisonous socialist and postmodern beliefs. It’s not a coincidence that most young adults graduate from our schools believing a certain narrative about America that is hyper critical of our country, without an equally robust critique of other nations. This missing context largely explains why so many students are unable to see Western values in general, and America in particular, of being worthy of defense. We have the tenured radicals in academia to thank for this condition.

In the heyday of the Cold War, both knowingly and unknowingly, such radical intellectuals served as a reliable conduit for anti-U.S. propaganda generated in the think tanks of Moscow. The technical details were described by a number of defectors from the Eastern Bloc intelligence agencies, the highest-ranking of whom was Ion Mihai Pacepa ^[3], acting chief of Romania’s espionage service.

“The whole foreign policy of the Soviet-bloc states, indeed its whole economic and military might, revolved around the larger Soviet objective of destroying America from within through the use of lies,” Pacepa writes. “The Soviets saw disinformation as a vital tool in the dialectical advance of world Communism. … Many ‘Ban-the-Bomb’ and anti-nuclear movements were KGB-funded operations, too. I can no longer look at a petition for world peace or other supposedly noble cause, particularly of the anti-American variety, without thinking to myself, ‘KGB.’

“As far as I’m concerned, the KGB gave birth to the antiwar movement in America,” Pacepa continues. “KGB chairman Yuri Andropov managed our anti-Vietnam War operation. He often bragged about having damaged the U.S. foreign-policy consensus, poisoned domestic debate in the U.S., and built a credibility gap between America and European public opinion through our disinformation operations. Vietnam was, he once told me, ‘our most significant success.’”

It’s a sad and tragic irony that so many people, what Lenin called “useful idiots”, opposed the war because they wanted to save lives. Yet little did they know, or care to learn, that more people died during the four years following the communist ‘peace’ than did the entire tens years of war on both sides combined.

The fraudulent image of America as the “violent imperialist aggressor” was picked up by the Western media, disseminated through activist groups, and found its way into policy making, exemplified by John Kerry’s 1971 “Genghis Khan” testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, where Kerry almost verbatim repeated the KGB fabrications ^[4], later recognized by Pacepa as his own subversive product.

“KGB priority number one at that time was to damage American power, judgment, and credibility,” Pacepa recalls. “One of its favorite tools was the fabrication of such evidence as photographs and ‘news reports’ about invented American war atrocities. These tales were purveyed in KGB-operated magazines that would then flack them to reputable news organizations. … All in all, it was amazingly easy for Soviet-bloc spy organizations to fake many such reports and spread them around the free world.”

And how eager much of our media and universities were to accept as fact these fraudulent reports.

Our sensory organs may perceive the same reality, but our knowledge of the world depends on how our minds interpret our perceptions and connect the dots. A successful propaganda campaign modifies that process by inserting, in a manner of speaking, a prefabricated optical lens that redirects incoming information and rearranges the existing dots. It may remain unnoticed for a while because the distortion affects limited designated areas - in this case, political ideology. One still is the same person, except that when he thinks of political, economic, or social issues, lies suddenly become perceived as the truth, right as wrong, good as evil, enemies as friends, and so on.

Ultimately, the most successful, moral, and just country in the history of humanity becomes perceived as a violent monster feeding on the bodies of innocent victims.

This perception continues to this day, as the views expressed by our intelligentsia and media all echo the same hatred for this country. This explains how America could go from electing patriotic protectors of individual liberty and free markets, to electing a man who embodies the exact opposite of those ideals. Keeping alive the anti-Americanism from the 1960s is a strategy still employed by the political left today.

During his recent visit to Moscow, President Obama stated ^[6]:

America supports … the restoration of the democratically-elected president of Honduras, even though he has strongly opposed American policies.

But didn’t Obama himself oppose American policies just as strongly and from the same ideological perspectives? His own history suggests that saying “because he has strongly opposed American policies” would have been a more honest use of conjunctions.

From his communist mentor Frank Marshall Davis to the unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, Barack Obama has always gravitated towards people holding radical leftist views akin to those of Zelaya. He eagerly promoted leftist ideology as an ACORN activist and later when he taught and developed theories ^[7] that opposed the American system of individual liberties in favor of unsustainable group entitlements at the expense of producers - theories that advocated placing the people under the controlling “care” of the state.

And since such views are part of the ideological template that vilifies America and lionizes its enemies, Obama’s instinctive reaction was to back Zelaya and throw a lifeline to Ahmadinejad ^[8].

Obama is also a student of Saul Alinsky, a rabid anti-American, and guru of left wing activism and author of Rules for Radicals, who laid the groundwork for community agitation.

… President Obama may be acting in good faith, but his processing of reality is just as impaired by the same “metaphorical deformation.” As a result, the leader of the free world strays across the frontlines and joins the Marxist leaders Hugo Chavez, Raul Castro, Evo Morales, and Daniel Ortega, at least two of whom - Castro and Ortega - were committed Soviet clients.

The Soviet Union may have self-destructed in 1991, but the seeds of intellectual deception it had planted gave such a bountiful crop that seventeen years later America has elected a leader who is guided by received notions designed to subdue and destroy this country. Apparently, the rumors about America’s victory in the Cold War appear to have been greatly exaggerated.

Those seeds of ideological subversion have been planted long ago and are explained in great detail by a former agent who defected from the Soviet Union. This video is rather old, but his words are just as relevant today. Perhaps more so.

Without fail, every movement in history that tried to create a heaven on earth ended up creating something closer to hell. Back in 2007 at Greenville, South Carolina, the then Senator Barack Obama told a congregation, “I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth.”