Sapientiam Autem Non Vincit Malitia - Foto da águia: Donald Mathis Mande um e-mail para o Olavo Links Textos Informações Página principal

 

The right hand of the left

OLAVO DE CARVALHO
O Globo, June 9, 2001

Translated by Assunção Medeiros


Since the fall of the URSS, our national left has made efforts day and night to warn our nationalists — especially those from the Armed Forces — against the danger of the unipolar world, and to persuade them to become leftist for the sake of patriotism. There are people that make a living of this, and there are people — even in the Armed Forces — who believe in them. But only a perfect idiot does not realize that the dominant world power that imposes on us the economic policies against which the left fights is the same one that imposes on us the politically correct concepts, abortion, feminism, ecology and all the cultural models that constitute the program of the left itself.

It is much less possible for an average sane mind to avoid noticing that the multimillionaire foundations and multinational companies that subsidize the diffusion of these new models of conduct are the same that, on the other hand, support the implementation of the New World Order and of the economic policies that the apostles of these models claim to execrate.

And whomever notices these two things cannot but reach the conclusion that the unipolar world is even more unipolar than the spokesmen from the left would wish to be known. It is so unipolar that from it come not only the proposals the left hates, but also the ones it loves and personifies. And from it, equally, comes the money used to subsidize the implementation of one thing and the other.

The left, in sum, utilizes a stereotyped vocabulary from the time of bipolarity to deceive the nationalists, disorient them and subjugate them to the global strategy, attracting their attacks to a false target so that they do not realize where the real one is. The essential component of this vocabulary is the old identification of “North-American” with  “conservative-capitalist”, of which we derive, automatically, the confusion of nationalism with statism, the Welfare State and, last not least, Socialism.

It is with the aim of legitimizing this brutal farce that the current discourse of men from the left against the IMF and the New World Order presents these two phenomena as if they were the quintessence of conservative-capitalism and not precisely the opposite — as history demonstrates — just pure socialist inventions destined to strangle, together with economic freedom, political freedom in the world. The IMF and the New World Order are chapters in the history of an overwhelming centralization that sacrifices all in the altar of bureaucratic control and planned economy, idols a thousand times denounced, whose mystical powers the socialist propaganda promises will heal all maladies. Of the first, its own inventor, Lord Keynes, said it was “essentially a socialist conception”. As to the second, it was from beginning to end the creation of the famous Londoner “think tank” of gradualist socialism that, after passing through several denominations, ended up becoming notorious as the Fabian Society. It was one of its most illustrious members, the writer H. G. Wells, who delineated, in 1928, the entire program of the New World Order and published it in his book  “Open Conspiracy”.

“Open” is poetic license. So is “conspiracy”. The Fabian socialism never got involved in attacks, gatherings, or manifestations, much less in basement conspiracies. All it did was to prepare intellectuals to be placed in high-level assessorial positions from which they could, discreetly but without any secrecy, inoculate socialist ideas inside the minds of government leaders. This scheme was invented by the theoretician Graham Wallas, who, five decades in advance, formulated the Gramscian strategy of the “occupation of spaces” and of  “passive revolution” (and to think that Gramsci even poses as a genius!). The magnitude of the effects of this things contrasts singularly with the circumspection of the means. Practically all the great turns of modern economy towards the centralizing and socializing trends of the welfare State were planned by Fabian socialists. Just to give you an idea of the reach of their influence, the government plans from three of the most powerful — and the most state-centralizing — among the presidents of the USA, Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Johnson, were directly copied from works of Fabian authors, and even adopted their titles: Roosevelt’s “New Deal” comes from a Stuart Chase book, Kennedy’s “New Frontier” from a book by Henry Wallace, and Johnson’s “Great Society” from a book by Graham Wallas himself.

Regardless of their soft style, rather social-democratic than communist, the Fabian always considered the URSS a valued ally in their fight against conservative-capitalism. Deep down, it was much more than this: deserters from KGB informed that at least one of the books by Sidney Webb, the most famous president of the Fabian Society, was not written by him, but came already written from the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Relations. It is understandable. Much earlier than Gramsci, the URSS had also discovered the virtues of reformist gradualism that, from above and without hardness, socializes the world faster than thousands of Che Guevaras could — these being the authentic scapegoats of the only socialism that always ends victorious.

The supreme advantage of the discreet method is that, when the ingenious state-centralizing plans from unknown socialist intellectuals from the people at last weigh heavily in the pockets of the masses with the immeasurable cost of their foolishness, there always are in the market radical left intellectuals who, ignoring or pretending to ignore all the work of their Fabian partners, lay all the blame of the disaster on...  conservative capitalism!

Let not thy left hand see what thy right hand does, teaches the Bible. Socialism has its own demoniacal version of this teaching: let not thy noisy masses see what thy silent allies do  — and thus, not knowing who oppresses them, they will detonate their fury on the scapegoat that is most convenient to the strategy.

All that is left to know is whether our nationalists — specially the ones from the Armed Forces — will consent to reduce themselves to playing the part of manipulated masses.

 

Home - Informações - Textos - Links - E-mail