Join Our Members List For Exclusive Reports






I have been reeling since my recent discovery of Dr Michael Rectenwald, because I’ve had a similar ideological trajectory and recent, unexpected upheaval. I even studied for a year at NYU, where he was a professor.

Although my college major at Brown University was called Semiotics, it was actually more like Postmodernist, Marxist-Freudian cultural criticism and at the time, I felt like I was majoring in a nervous breakdown!

Dr Rectenwald joins Alex Newman, publisher of The New American magazine to discuss the development of the incredibly nefarious Social Justice movement that has recently exploded onto the scene and which has come to define the Democrat Party, Big Tech, Antifa, transnational corporations and the dread New World Order.

Social Justice sounds nice but it’s not. Dr Rectenwald explains that the contemporary Social Justice movement has nothing to do with the original movement founded in the mid-1800s by Luigi Taparelli, a Jesuit monk. It was not about the redistribution of wealth but it was about charity.

Mid-20th century philosophers, like John Rawls and William James Booth transformed the concept of Social Justice into this Communist ideal of economic and social equality as an absolute and necessary goal. More recently, Stalinist and Maoist tactics have been brought into the movement that mimic those of the Cultural Revolution of Communist China (1966-1976), when Mao instructed his Red Guards to tear down everything in society; all tradition, all historical memory, all cultural legacies.

These sensibilities insinuated themselves into French universities, where I absorbed them while studying for a year at the Sorbonne.

Dr Rectenwald says there is a complete parallel to be made between the Social Justice movement in America today and the Chinese Cultural Revolution. “It’s a softer version but it’s not any less pernicious in a sense, because it’s actually happening more subtly and it’s less catastrophist, if you will, more of a gradualist campaign.

“But this makes it more insidious, almost because it’s not so blatant, so it’s happening sort of surreptitiously under the surface. But it’s very, very, very, very much like they’re ripping, as you said, historical monuments, historical memory, legacies of culture, all being gutted from the curriculum, from statuaries and all forms of museums and road signs and names of schools and names of streets on and on and on. They just want to raze the whole cultural legacy to the ground.

“‘The West is horrible’, despite being that the West is best. And that’s the thing that they have this guilt complex about, is the idea that the West had a belief in itself at some point. Oh my. What a terrible thing.”

Dr Rectenwald suggests that the best way to stand up to this pernicious movement is to have it legally classified as a religion. “Once it’s dubbed a religion in the US at least, where it seems to be birthing most vehemently, we can then say, ‘Look, this doctrine has to be excluded from public schools. It can be taught but it can’t be the basis of the school system,’ which it is now…We have to declare it a religion, get it marked clearly as a religion, then we can use the separation clause to exclude it from the public school system –

“[Social Justice] has rituals…it is a belief system that is based strictly on belief and no data. It is not an evidence-based system…

“For example, if somebody declares their gender to be male, there’s no empirical data that’s necessary. They just merely state it. So, it’s a belief that’s enunciated and that’s the end of it. And we have to believe that and go along with it and everybody must play along. I think Christianity has more data than that, by a longshot…

“So, it’s ritualistic and it’s a belief system with no knowledge base…it’s completely based on the credulity of anyone who buys into it and so therefore, I’d say you know we can dub this a thing of religion. If we have to go into a treatise to do so, I mean I talked about it a bit in the book but I could develop it further…

“If you want to be a Social Justice school, go ahead, be a Social Justice school but like a Christian school, they would say, ‘This is a Christian Academy,’ or something like that…you have the freedom to do that here, in this country but it should…be explicitly stated, rather than implicitly, insidiously undermining everything, without being acknowledged as such…

“Transgenderism should not be understood as anything but a major piece of the Social Justice creed and movement. There’s this huge push for everybody to change their genders for some reason…

“Basically, they want to destabilize all social ontology, because this is the means by which the state becomes all-powerful or the corporate state, if you will…

“The idea is to completely raze the social ontologies to the ground, to upend all – the family has to go…typically, you have a man and a wife or a husband and a spouse or a man and a woman. Well, if you get rid of those, you’re 90% of the way finished with the family, with the a nuclear family and that’s definitely one of the objectives.

“They want to get rid of the family, because the family is a buffer; it’s an ideological and instrumental and educative barrier to the all-powerful statism, that these people want.

“They’re totalitarians at their core. They’re absolutely totalitarian. They want total control and power and they want it vested in the state and they want to be in the state, themselves.

“It’s already happening. I mean, you see it going on, at least digitally, right? You see all these digital disappearances that are taking place. And then you see that the restriction of movement of people that are on the Right or anything but Left whack jobs. For example, like Laura Loomer can’t even go into the UK, Milo Yiannopoulos cannot go into Australia.

So, they’re already putting these digital fences up, which is the next step and I talk about all this in my next book, which is out this month, ‘Google Archipelago’. They’re erecting these digital gulags, if you will and then also digitally deleting people, in effect.

“Because once you have all the public sphere transferred on to the digital realm and then the digital realm is controlled by people that are actually statists, that are also corporatists – I mean, this is just this crazy amalgamation of state and corporate power that’s going on. I’m all for free markets but this is not free markets, at all. This is absolute statist monopolies.

“So these monopolies want global-state-one-nation, you know, they want to get rid of nationalism. Of course, they hate Trump because he’s nationalist. They want to get rid of borders. They want to get rid of everything that stands in the way of One World-ism or Globalism.”

Alexandra Bruce

Contributed by

Contact

You Might Like

Alexandra Bruce

Alexandra Bruce

View all posts

3 comments

  • All those fancy universities and you didn’t manage to pick up a sub-editor. What does this mean? “Well, if you get rid of those, you’re 90% of the way finished with the family, with the a nuclear family and that’s definitely one of the objectives.”

  • wow! I see this happening already at the kindergarten level…this is very frightening Thanks for the pre-Halloween special! Keep them coming!

  • Belief. No data, no truth, war torn muddied memories, absolute obedience and death to anyone against said dystopian melarchy. Sounds like OOtube.

Most Viewed Posts

Categories