Karla Marx And The Man Haters

With eye-opening revelations, ""Karla Marx and the Man-haters"" explores the past and present politics of the women's movement in seven chapters: Politics, Family, Media, Government, Education, Finance and Religion. More than 400 endnotes and citations are provided. Karl Marx compiled ""Manifesto of the Communist Party"" in 1848. Now we have Karla Marx, who personifies today's radical feminist activist with her egregious messages of liberation and equality that covertly limit our rights and subtly usurp our freedom through authoritarian control. "Karla Marx" was first published in 2008. Now this latest edition incorporates updates, revisions and original material in two new chapters and more than 75 new pages. (An electronic version is also available most through most online retailers.)

Karla Marx and her phalanx of comrades hide behind a message of liberation and equality; however, radical feminism supports Marxist goals that curtail our liberties, rights and freedom - subtly, covertly and egregiously.Because Karla Marx wants us to repeat the disastrous history of Marxism, she hides that horrific past from us so that we cannot learn from it. With eye-opening revelations, this book explores that past and the present-day politics that undermine the family, control media and academia and subvert the highest levels of our government.Unless her true intentions and associations are revealed, Karla Marx will gain ever higher and irrational levels of authoritarian power that will ultimately oppress and impoverish the population for generations and centuries to come. She's counting on our ignorance and apathy. "Karla Marx: How feminism has seduced the West" seeks to counter that strategy.

Strife has raged about Karl Marx for decades, and never had it been so embittered as at the time of this book’s first publication, 1936. Marx had impressed his image on the time as not other had done. To some he was – and still is – a fiend, the arch-enemy of human civilisation, and the prince of chaos, while to others he is a far-seeing and beloved leader, guiding the human race towards a brighter future. The arena in which Marx was fought about in 1936 was in the factories, in the parliaments and at the barricades. In both camps, the bourgeois and the socialist, Marx was first of all, if not exclusively, the revolutionary. This book sets out to describe the life of Marx the fighter.

While atheists such as Richard Dawkins have now become public figures, there is another and perhaps darker strain of religious rebellion that has remained out of sight--people who hate God. In this revealing book, Bernard Schweizer looks at men and women who do not question God's existence, but deny that He is merciful, competent, or good. Sifting through a wide range of literary and historical works, Schweizer finds that people hate God for a variety of reasons. Some are motivated by social injustice, human suffering, or natural catastrophes that God does not prevent. Some blame God for their personal tragedies. Schweizer concludes that, despite their blasphemous thoughts, these people tend to be creative and moral individuals, and include such literary lights as Friedrich Nietzsche, Mark Twain, Zora Neale Hurston, Rebecca West, Elie Wiesel, and Philip Pullman. Schweizer shows that literature is a fertile ground for God haters. Many authors, who dare not voice their negative attitude to God openly, turn to fiction to give vent to it. Indeed, Schweizer provides many new and startling readings of literary masterpieces, highlighting the undercurrent of hatred for God. Moreover, by probing the deeper mainsprings that cause sensible, rational, and moral beings to turn against God, Schweizer offers answers to some of the most vexing questions that beset human relationships with the divine.

This small book is intended, as were the lectures in which it first took form, to be an introduction to the study of Marxs Capital. It is not meant to be a substitute for such study. It is the fate of all great books tp get bcdleA-down and served up cold in text-books, which purport to tell exactly what the great book comes to, as though a mans conclusions were worth very much apart from the way in which he arrived at them. We must all have had the experience, after reading even appreciative books about great authors, of going back to the authors themselves and finding how much more there is in them than their commentators lead us to expect. Marxs Capital is obviously a book of historical importance, and any one who reads it impartially will find it greater and far more illuminating than most critics of Marx would like us, or most Marxian writers allow us to believe. There are two ways in which it is indefensible to treat a great book, ways which seem nevertheless to characterize much of what is said of Marx in this country the way of uncritical condemnation and the way. of uncritical praise. There are some books on Marx in which are collected all his inconsistencies and nothing else, as though there was nothing in Marx but inconsistencies. Such books give the impression that Marx was one of the most muddle-headed, idiots that ever lived. On the other hand, some of his interpreters seem to have given up the belief in the verbal insgiratipn of scripture for the belief in the verbal inspiration of Capital and try to maintain that there are no inconsistencies in Marx at all. We might surely be prepared, without having read a word of Marx, to reject both these extreme views. Mere inconsistent thinking has never made history as Capital has made it. But no man who has brought about a great revolution in thought has ever been without inconsistencies. The original thinker is too much occupied in trying to express the creative thought which is welling up in him to trouble himself about getting it all straightened out. There are always parts of his work which he has taken over as they stood from other people...

“On The Jewish Question” (OTJQ) was written by Karl Marx and exposes his anti-Semitism. The complete work is here in its entirety for your analysis. It was an inspiration to Adolf Hitler. OTJQ and other work (e.g. the term “Aryan” used by Marx repeatedly in his “Ethnological Notebooks”) were the same ideas that motivated Hitler to gain power in Germany. Top mind-blowing discoveries of the 21st Century were revealed by Marx and his OTJQ (thanks to the academic critique of Professor Rex Curry). Many revelations came to light years after Marx’s death. Some are enumerated in the following paragraphs. For example, the following facts (with credit to Dr. Curry) will be news to most readers: 1. Marx’s anti-Semitism (and his Christian background) inspired Hitler’s anti-Semitism and Hitler’s use of Christian cross symbolism including the SWASTIKA (the Hakenkreuz or “hooked cross”); Iron Cross; Balkenkreuz; Krückenkreuz; and the common Christian cross. The symbols signified commonality with Marx’s opposition to Judaism, and they promoted Christianity as the “alternative” thereto. The Swastika was also used to represent “S” letter shapes for “SOCIALISM” (Marx’s underlying dogma). 2. NEW SWASTIKA DISCOVERY: Hitler’s symbol is the reason why Hitler renamed his political party from DAP to NSDAP - "National Socialist German Workers Party" - because he needed the word "Socialist" in his party's name so that Hitler could use swastikas as "S"-letter shaped logos for "SOCIALIST" as the party's emblem. The party's name had to fit in Hitler's socialist branding campaign that used the swastika and many other similar alphabetical symbols, including the “NSV" and "SA” and “SS” and “VW” etc. 3. NEW LENIN’S SWASTIKA REVELATION: Vladimir Lenin’s swastika is exposed herein. The impact of Lenin’s swastikas was reinforced at that time with additional swastikas on ruble money (paper currency) under Soviet socialism. The swastika became a symbol of socialism under Lenin. It’s influence upon Adolf Hitler is explained in this book. Lenin’s Christian background was similar to Marx’s. Marx’s anti-Semitism (and his religious upbringing) inspired Lenin’s anti-Semitism and the use of the SWASTIKA as Christian cross symbolism after 1917. The swastika symbol signified commonality with Marx’s opposition to Judaism. Judaism was banned by Soviet socialists. Under Lenin, the Russian Orthodox Church remained powerful (then Stalin became tyrant in 1922). The Swastika was also used to represent “S” letter shapes for “SOCIALISM” (Marx’s underlying dogma). 4. Marx, Hitler and their supporters self-identified as “socialists” by the very word in voluminous speeches and writings. The term "Socialist" appears throughout Mein Kampf as a self-description by Hitler. (Marx also used the term “Communist”). 5. Hitler was heavily influenced by Marx. Many socialists in the USA were also shaped by Marx. Two famous American socialists (the cousins Edward Bellamy and Francis Bellamy) were heavily influenced by Marx. The American socialists returned the favor: Francis Bellamy created the “Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag” that produced Nazi salutes and Nazi behavior. The Bellamy cousins were American national socialists. 6. Hitler never called himself a "Nazi." There was no “Nazi Germany.” There was no “Nazi Party.” 7. Hitler never called himself a “Fascist.” Modern socialists use “Nazi” and “Fascist” to hide how Hitler and his comrades self-identified: SOCIALIST. 9. The term “Nazi” isn’t in "Mein Kampf" nor in "Triumph of the Will." 10. The term “Fascist” never appears in Mein Kampf as a self-description by Hitler. 11. The term “swastika” never appears in the original Mein Kampf. 12. There is no evidence that Hitler ever used the word “swastika.” 13. The symbol that Hitler did use was intended to represent “S”-letter shapes for “socialist.” 14. Hitler altered his own signature to show his “S-shapes for socialism” logo branding.

This volume presents a close reading of instances of Shakespearean quotations, allusions, imagery and rhetoric found in Karl Marx’s collected works and letters, which provides evidence that Shakespeare’s writings exerted a formative influence on Marx and the development of his work. Through a methodology of intertextual and interlingual close-reading, this study provides evidence of the extent to which Shakespeare influenced Marx and to which Marxism has Shakespearean roots. As a child, Marx was home-schooled in Ludwig von Westphalen’s little academy, as it were, which was Shakespeare- and literary-focused. The group included von Westphalen’s daughter, who later became Marx’s wife, Jenny. The influence of Shakespeare in Marx’s writings shows up as early as his school essays and love letters. He modelled his early journalism partly on ideas and rhetoric found in Shakespeare’s plays. Each turn in the development of Marx’s thought—from Romantic to Left Hegelian and then to Communist—is achieved in part through his use of literature, especially Shakespeare. Marx’s mature texts on history, politics and economics—including the famous first volume of Das Kapital—are laden with Shakespearean allusions and quotations. Marx's engagement with Shakespeare resulted in the development of a framework of characters and imagery he used to stand for and anchor the different concepts in his political critique. Marx’s prose style uses a conceit in which politics are depicted as performative. Later, the Marx family—Marx, Jenny and their children—was central in the late-19th-century revival of Shakespeare on the London stage, and in the growth of academic Shakespeare scholarship. Through providing evidence for a formative role of Shakespeare in the development of Marxism, the present study suggests a formative role for literature in the history of ideas.