Skip to main content

(Part 1) SJWs Have Always Lied. A Fisking of Soviet Civilization (1952) by Corliss Lamont

Today, the West is under heavy attack from a specific ideological group that has elevated flinging poo and screaming inanities to a fine art. The Social Justice Warriors, and their band of adherents will do anything, attack anyone, and trample all over badthink in order to advance their cause and crush opposition.

Facts mean nothing to an SJW, vitriolic rhetoric is their first and only line of attack and defense. They will attack ideological deviants with a fervor and ferocity that is unmatched by any but the adherents of Mao during the Chinese pogrom known as the Cultural Revolution.

In the West, the elevation of SJW fascists to high visibility and praise for their attacks on decency and freedom is a relatively new phenomena, but their adherents have been spewing falsehoods and attacking western thought and ideas for many decades. Until recently however, they generally masked their hatred of freedom and western civilization with a veneer of detachment of moderation.

Such a man was proto-SJW Corliss Lamont. Born in 1902, and passing away in 1995, his life spanned most of the twentieth century, a century that he spent writing against America and praising Communism. A man who glossed over the worst of Soviet atrocities, and never met a Communist thought or idea that he didn't like, Corliss Lamont was a true SJW before that expression had even been coined, and when the vast majority of today's SJWs were yet unborn(or unaborted, which is probably a more accurate summation of their attitudes toward prenatal homicide).

And in 1952, he published a book on the Soviet Union that lays bare the unbelievable credulity and duplicity of  SJWs when it comes to explaining away inconvenient facts and so cruelly mauling the truth that it is left bleeding and dying in the gutter. And its all done from behind the pretense of a moderate. His book? Soviet Civilization (1952, Second Edition 1955). Lets go over some "high" points of the book, by taking a quote or two from several of the most credulous chapters and looking at it and what the chapter says overall.

Keep in mind that Stalin was still ruling over Russia at this time, the KGB was under Beria, and violence and repression were the hallmarks of Russian society. People disappeared randomly, the slightest whiff of suspicion could ruin your life, and Khrushchev's "secret speech" to the Twentieth Congress was still several years away.

But don't you worry, Corliss Lamont is ready and willing to use his keen...something to fearlessly navigate the complex shoals of Russia and lay it bare to our searching eye.

Preface to Second Edition: 
(Page XXIII)"Since this volume is critical of many things in Soviet civilization, it will not please left-wing groups who consider the Soviet Union above all criticism. On the other hand, because the book is sympathetic to the true achievements of the Soviets, it is likely to be denounced by the dogmatic right as Communist propaganda or Utopian naivete. I am repelled by the dictatorial and repressive aspects of the Soviet regime, but am unwilling to join in wholesale condemnations of it based on a one-sided over-emphasis of its negative points."

This is a great example of Lamont's prose and double talk. He paints himself as a balanced observer, and claims that he is going to look at the bad and the good in the Soviet Union fairly. Surely such a fair minded man is going to present a balanced picture of the Soviet Union.

Well no, not even close. Lamont's idea of being "critical" of the Soviet Union is to mildly shake his finger in their general direction, before rushing to explain away the problem as being ultimately the problem of either a nebulous concept known as "Russia's developing democracy" or his favorite bugaboo of American insert-pejorative-here. Basically its all America's fault, and the Russians are the helpless victims.

Chapter 1: On Evaluating Soviet Russia

(Page 8) "Portraying the U.S.S.R. as a mystery is, like the Iron Curtain stereotype, a substitute for real thinking and an excuse for laziness in seeking out the facts."

A good chunk of this chapter involves Lamont complaining about how close minded Americans are and how they need to stop being so doggone suspicious of those friendly Soviets. He complains about the McCarran Act, an act that according to him, barred from the USA anyone who ever belonged to a Communist or Fascist party. And as we know, Communist parties in the USA absolutely love their country and would certainly never attempt to eat away at it from within.

This whining about American close mindedness towards Communists (something that we could use today) permeates the chapter. Apparently this attitude and legislative acts of this ilk are crippling scientific exchange on "economics, political science...race relations." Admittedly, the Soviet Union had a great deal to teach us about the first two subjects...largely what NOT to do of course, but such delicacies of thought are beyond the ken of Comrade Lamont.

Regarding the last...we see that an obsession with race and equality is not a new thing in the SJW world. Comrade Lamont would undoubtedly be marching in BLM rallies today, in between Occupying people's lawns. And he apparently strongly felt that the equality of poverty, deprivation, and servitude that the races had attained in the Soviet Union represented a massive lap ahead of the USA. Indeed.

Overall, Comrade Lamont thinks America sucks and is too close minded about learning from the Soviet Union. He also puts in a few swipes at Churchill for perpetrating the Iron Curtain analogy and bruising the feelings of caring Soviets and intellectuals such as Comrade Lamont and his band of merry Marxists. One wonders at times why he chose to live here, instead of over in Mother Russia.

Chapter 2: The Soviet Constitution

"The rapid development of Soviet Russia between 1924 and 1936 necessitated the framing of a new Constitution that would reflect the changed conditions. The first two Five-Year Plans, particularly, had brought about such progress in both industry and agriculture that Stalin was able to say 'The complete victory of the socialist system in all spheres of national economy is now a fact.' Hence the 1936 document, advancing beyond the Constitutions of 1918 and 1924, which had proclaimed socialism as an object of aspiration, formalized the new situation by treating socialism in the Soviet Union as an achieved actuality.""

This chapter is a real treat. According to Comrade Lamont, the Soviet Constitution is basically such an amazing piece of work that its creators should be elevated to sainthood. Or whatever the atheist variant of that is.  He is talking about the 1936 Soviet Constitution in this case, not the 1918 or 1924 Constitutions, which were completely different works.

The Soviets also had to change their Constitutions due to economic progress. Or something. You will remember how America had to do a completely new Constitution after the booming economic progress of the 1890s, and yet another one after the economic boom of the 1950s.

Note how the 1936 Soviet Constitution had to "advance beyond" the previous Constitutions. Clearly Comrade Lamont knew his Hegel. Comrade Lamont then proceeds to exculpate the Soviet Union for not following its own Constitution by claiming that it, like, totally will eventually, before veering off on a tangent regarding the American Constitution and how its Bill of Rights are frequently flagrantly violated "by government officials as well as non-governmental(?) groups."  Because the two are totally similar!

So while Comrade Lamont admits that at the present time the Soviet Union's Constitution is a "paper constitution"(Page 51), he says that's okay because the Bill of Rights is violated in America. He then backtracks and claims that after sixteen years in operation, the Soviet Constitution was more in effect than not.

Admittedly, under this Constitution millions of Soviets were arrested, tortured, murdered by the state, sent to gulags, had no due process, and lived under ever present surveillance...but Comrade Lamont acknowledges none of this things(well, he does acknowledge the gulags. Enough to attack people for falsely claiming that they exist. Apparently saying that is a base canard.) In Lamont-Land, all is quiet and democratic along the Volga.

The rest of that chapter lauds the Soviets for attaining a miraculous level of home ownership of sixty percent! Where this figure comes from, Comrade Lamont does not say. I personally suspect fairies, LSD, and an astounding level of credulity about Soviet pronouncements. He claims that credit was easy to come by to buy a house, and only carried a 2 percent interest. Clearly, Comrade Lamont's knowledge of basic economics was only equaled by his stupendous level of wisdom about a country that he admits he hadn't visited since the 1930s. Actual adults with reading skills and such, can easily find out that not only was private property difficult to come by in the Soviet Union, credit was almost nonexistent. And the currency was revalued multiple times throughout the Soviet Union's existence as it struggled to keep its tottering economy moving.

On Page 57 we find out that "In the Soviet Union the principle of performing useful work amounts to gospel. It naturally conduces, through ever-increasing production, to the general welfare and also to individual happiness, since the average Soviet citizen is absorbed in a socially significant job that brings meaning into his life." Additionally "there is no place for idlers in Soviet Russia." Apparently Comrade Lamont never heard the very common Soviet proverb "they pretend to pay us, so we pretend to work."

Furthermore, drunkenness and laziness were bywords of Soviet industry, one of the many reasons why the Soviet Union had to import so much food and steal so much technology just to try to keep going. Capable of producing an atomic bomb and launching men into orbit, the Soviet Union couldn't make a refrigerator that worked reliably, or a decent washing machine.

But don't tell Comrade Lamont that, it would hurt his feelings.

Comrade Lamont then spends a few pages defending that fact that elections in the Soviet Union involved one party: the Communist Party, and no others. This is apparently okay due to the fact that the Founding Fathers didn't envision a two-party system. No it doesn't make any sense to me either.
He claims that Soviet democracy is simply different than other democracies (and no, there is no recognizance of the fact that America was not set up as a democracy, but as a republic.)

On Page 71, he lauds the Soviet Union for all the "elective" positions that they have (Using the word "elective" very VERY loosely. A ballot with only one choice for a position is kind of a poor example of democracy by anyone's measure. Except for Comrade Lamont apparently.) Democracy in action folks! This is why the Chinese legislature, with almost three thousand members is such a bastion of freedom, free speech, and democracy. Soviet quantity equals democracy! In Soviet Union, Position elects YOU!

On Page 72 we have a brilliant example of SJW doublethinkplusgood. This sentence is a real gem, are you ready? "...there is in the Soviet Union a mixed governmental system in which dictatorship is conjoined with strong and growing elements of democracy." Dictatorship and democracy! A union made in...the Soviet Union apparently. Granted democracy usually leads to dictatorship, and a vicious circle of panem et circenses but I doubt that was Comrade Lamont's thought on this. No he actually just proclaimed that the Soviet Union, with Stalin at its helm, had a great mixture of democracy present. Under the repression, gulags, and terror I guess. Democracy is sneaky like that.

Lamont then casts his keen eagle bat eye onto the Soviet health system. Page 75 "I do not claim that every Soviet citizen is obtaining the best medical care; for Soviet medicine still lacks adequate supplies and a sufficient number of well-trained physicians. "I do claim however, that no one in Soviet Russia lacks proper medical service because he cannot afford it."(Underlines mine). The Soviets apparently had Obamacare sixty years before we did! With about the same level of success clearly.

Admittedly the Soviet health system lacked proper supplies (unless you had enough connections to illegally buy actual medicine from the decadent, imperialist West.), had poorly trained doctors in poorly equipped hospitals, patients frequently died from poor treatment and lack of proper equipment, and such(The Soviet version of Werner von Braun, Sergei Korolev died on the operating table during surgery, possibly due to the above factors, thus definitely denying the Soviets their brightest mind and their shot at the moon. And he was well off and well connected enough to have the best care that the Soviet health system could give. He also had permanent health problems due to injuries sustained during his brutal interrogation and six years in the gulag which contributed to his death...but of course that can't be true because Comrade Lamont says that those things never happened in Soviet Russia.)....but it was all free yep. What a great deal! Comrade Lamont apparently felt that the best thing that could be said about a health system was that it was free. Not that it, you know, worked or anything.

Comrade Lamont closes the chapter with a great clincher: "...the Soviet Constitution itself clearly belongs on the positive side of the ledger. It is a document that does great credit to its framers and that presents a grand design of human living of which the Soviet people can well be proud."

Indeed. Clearly it was utopia on earth. That's why the Soviet Union lasted so long and kept getting better and better and now is the dominant power in the world...oh wait.

Chapter 4: Soviet Russia and Religion

This must have been a hard chapter for Comrade Lamont to write. On the one hand, he clearly sneers from his intellectual tower down on the feeble minded peasants who believe in God and Christianity. On the other hand, he needs to present the Superior beings of the Soviet Union as benevolent towards such feeble minded individuals, while still showing that the Soviet Union was a Forward Thinking Nation With Science At Its Helm.

A hard task for even the best devoted propaganda expert. Goebbels himself would have blanched at the task. But Comrade Lamont is no ordinary wordsmith,. He was a Nietzschean man of words, an uber-mensch of twisting sentences and mauling the facts. He rose to the occasion like a dung beetle towards a cow patty. Let's see how he did.

He starts by painting the Orthodox church as massively backwards, harsh, and simpleminded. You see, it was necessary for  the scientific Communists to free men's minds from all religion! (Somewhat of a jump there.) Much of the first part of this chapter is focused on approvingly explaining Marxist theory on religion and how it is teh best thing EVAH to throw off its shackles.

Comrade Lamont then gets into the nitty-gritty of Soviet attitudes towards religious freedom. On Page 137 he beats the drum of the "separation of church and state" in the Soviet Union, with a healthy dose of praise for this development. Gosh, where have we heard that before? Then he approvingly quotes the 1918 government decree that supposedly allowed every Soviet citizen to practice any religion that they wanted to.

To quote Comrade Lamont on Page 139 "...there is complete freedom of conscience and worship in the Soviet Union..." clearly the issue is settled.

But of course, Corliss Lamont is lying through his SJW teeth with this statement, probably more so than any other statement above. Under Stalin (who I remind you, was still in power when this contemptible author published this paean to the Soviet Union), freedom of worship was non-existent. For an actual look at what conditions were like in the Soviet Union for believers, read  Sergei Kourdakov The Persecutor. As a KGB agent, he led raids on underground churches, took part in viciously beating believers, assisted in stripping girls found at underground services naked and taking them through the night to the police station in that condition. Pastors at these churches were beaten to death at times, and cudgels were freely applied to skulls. Admittedly without discrimination for gender or race, so a...laudable achievement?

This is the "freedom of religion" that this lying SJW (but I repeat myself) so approvingly cites. Corliss Lamont was a contemptible Communist apologetic, no matter how much he tried to hide it with a veneer of scientific detachment. His lies were influential in many circles of thought in his day, and he never backed down. Soviet Civilization shows the lengths to which an SJW will lie, obfuscate, and say anything to promote their beliefs.

The wreckage of millions of lives and the deaths of many millions of innocents are glossed over by Corliss Lamont's works and writings. We din't even touch on his defense of the notorious Stalinist show trials on the late 30s, where torture was used to force confessions, and men were shot for no crime other than running afoul of Stalin's paranoia. We didn't touch Lamont's complete obfuscation of Stalin's liquidation of the Kulak's in the Ukraine, and the planned famine that left millions dead on Stalin's orders.

SJWs always lie, and they always double down.  Show them no mercy.


Popular posts from this blog

Partial Guide to Alt-Right Websites

Its an interesting time to be an American, especially if you are interested in politics and socioeconomics. The Internet has enabled many other-wise marginalized voices to be heard, and communities to sprout up around shared beliefs and goals.

One of the largest and fastest growing of these segments is the loose collection of websites known collectively as the "alt-right." While differing in many respects and exhibiting a tremendous degree of variety in their approach and tactics, the alt-right is largely unified around a respect for tradition and masculinity and is committed to largely libertarian ideals.  

There is much written that I do not endorse on these sites, but I do endorse a large portion of it and feel that Reality Hammer belongs in the same general political spectrum. Disagreements among intelligent men are nothing new, and are a very healthy thing, so long as these disagreements are carried on by rational adults who use the tools of logic to debate and disagre…

Fisking Sean Penn's Idiotic Editorial on Castro's Death

Today I was gifted with this astonishing (but not surprising) piece of idiocy from one of America’s foremost lovers of oppressive dictatorships and the men who run them, Comrade Sean Penn! He posted a rambling piece at the Daily Beast full of idiocy and whiney complaints about those MEANIES who were happy that Castro is dead. For good measure he doubled down about Castro: The Defender of The Poor People and the meanies who don’t like him. Those same MEANIES didn't vote for the Anointed Pantsuit either, and so Comrade Penn has a lot on his scrawny little libprog chest that he needs to get off. So let's have some fun!
My comments are in bold,Comrade Penn’s are initalics.
I was an American abroad, working overseas on this recent election night 2016. By midnight I was able to put myself to sleep, confidently, arrogantly, supremely certain that the election would go to Hillary Clinton, if not the Democrats at large.
Comrade Penn is kind enough to actually admit a by-now very evident t…

A Response to the Refugee Crisis

Trump recently issued an executive order temporarily barring individuals from seven countries from coming to the United States. From the panic and outrage emanating from the left, you would think he was dropping thousands of bombs on most of these countries. Oh wait that was Obama and Bush.

 The response from left has been the predictable outrage. However, the response from Christian left has been disturbing. By now, if you have been on Facebook, you have probably been inundated with posts and articles claiming you are not being Christian if we do not accept refugees.

Here are few common threads of these posts.

1. Theyare citing some verses from the Old Testament about welcoming the foreigner. 

Note these are usually the first to shriek about the dangers of theocracy in America. To watch their brains melt, ask them if they are also planning on stoning adulterers as well. The Bible isn't a buffet where you get to pick different verses you like. Instead, it is a series of dispensati…