Back Door Censorship

The Frankfurt School was dedicated to the destruction of the West. One of its founders, Willi Munzenberg, stated explicitly that its goal was to:
…organise the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilisation stink [sic]. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.
According to an article by Timothy Matthews in Catholic Insight, key strategies to achieve this goal were:
1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion.
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children.
4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority.
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking.
7. Emptying of churches.
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime.
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits.
10. Control and dumbing down of media.
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family.
Munzenberg stated

clipped from www.americanthinker.com Hate crimes legislation has its roots in the communist-inspired, so-called Frankfurt School founded in Frankfurt, Germany by Bolsheviks in the 1920s. Its goal was to implement communism in the West quietly by gradually subverting popular culture — a movement known as Cultural Marxism. One of its leading lights, Herbert Marcuse, opined that the prevailing Western social order is repressive by definition and discriminates against minorities simply by existing. This creates a phenomenon he called “repressive tolerance” Instead, he proposed what he called “partisan tolerance ,” i.e. tolerating the views of those “repressed minorities” only — who Marcuse assumes share his partisan hatred for everything noncommunist — while actively muzzling the views of the majority. They have been practicing “partisan tolerance.” That is, tolerance of the extreme Left and virulent intolerance of anything else.

The thinking behind the choice

For the first time of which I am aware we have a president that suggests the Constitution is not the standard on which to balance the scales of justice, rather one side of the scale needs to be weighed down with empathy. That’s kind of elusive and open-ended isn’t it?  The last word of Obama’s statement is the revelatory cornerstone: “OUTCOMES”. It is all about outcomes, not justice under the constitution with regard to human liberty. He wants a judge who will base decisions on a subjective standard of empathy, which minimizes responsibility, maximizes a contrived and unfair equality of outcomes, and places a fascist judicial system that regards the rights of individuals below the whims of the state’s definition of fairness.

clipped from www.foxnews.com “I will seek someone who understands that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook; it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives, whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation,” Obama said. “I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people’s hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes.”