The Common in Communism by Dean Gotcher

The Common in Communism.
The Karl Marx in You, your love of pleasure and hate of restraint, what we all have in common.

by
Dean Gotcher

Communism (common-ism) is so common today that most people can not see it for what it is, dangerous, having embraced it as their way of life. The Berlin Wall did not come down because Communism was defeated. It came down because Communism (common-ism) had succeeded, hiding itself in psychology. While Traditional Marxists (hard line Communists) forced Karl Marx on "the people," Transformational Marxists, through dialogue, i.e., through "group psychotherapy" facilitate 'change' (Marxism) by "helping" "the people" 'discover' and then 'liberate' the Karl Marx in themselves, negating the father's/Father's authority in their thoughts and actions ("theory and practice"), so they can, as children of disobedience, do wrong, disobey, sin without having a guilty conscience, i.e., so they can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity instead. There is not longer a sense of guilt for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning when the father's/Father's authority (accountability) is no longer a part of the child's thoughts ('reasoning'). In dialectic (dialogue) 'reasoning' there is no father's/Father's authority. In dialogue the father's/Father's authority is automatically excluded.

"The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult." "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin, A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers)

It is the father's/Father's authority (threat of chastening or being cast out for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning) that engenders a guilty conscience (fear of judgment) in the child when he is thinking about doing, is doing, or has done what he wants against the father's/Father's commands and rules. If the child can be placed in an environment (a "safe zone/place/space") where he, along with other children, can share his opinion, i.e., i.e., his "feelings," i.e., his carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' without fear of the father's/Father's authority, i.e., without fear of judgment and condemnation, i.e., without fear of being chastened or cast out, the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning is negated, allowing him (along with the rest of the children) to do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity.

"As the Frankfurt School wrestled with how to 'reinvigorate Marx', they 'found the missing link in Freud [dialogue].'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination) The "Frankfurt School" was a group of Marxists, i.e., Transformational Marxists (Transformational Marxists merge Marx and Freud, i.e., socialism and psychology, i.e., "the group" and the individual), who, fleeing Nazi Germany, came to the United States in the 30's. Entering our Universities they advised our national leaders, courts, educators, media, ministers, and corporations on how to facilitate 'change,' i.e., advance Marxism through psychology (group psychotherapy), training up the next generation of "professionals" to do the same. Instead of forcing Marx "down peoples throats," as traditional leaders do, Transformational Marxists "help" them 'discover' and then 'liberate' the Karl Marx, i.e., the love of pleasure and hate of restraint in them, doing it in "the group."

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory) There is no traditional authority in dialogue, only the individual's desire to "lust" after (covet) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, with him manifesting his or her hate of restraint, i.e., hatred toward the father's/Father's authority when it gets in his way, i.e., in the way to pleasure.

"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16 Apart from "the Father," i.e., the father's/Father's authority all we have is "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," "all that is in [and "of"] the world."

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you:" 2 Peter 2:3 Marxism would not work if Karl Marx was not already in you, coveting the things (pleasures) of the world, waiting to be seduced, deceived, and manipulated, and then used (bought and sold) as "natural resource" ("human resource") by facilitators of 'change' (Marxists) for their own pleasure and gain—with your approval (affirmation)—until you wake up (if you ever do), after it is too late.

Marxists (common-ists), in ignorance (in defiance to God), seek to resolve the conflict between man and God (sensuousness and righteousness) by getting rid of God (righteousness), i.e., by negating the father's/Father's authority with all its commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is (by faith) and obeyed. The idea being: if there is no Father (Father's authority), i.e., no commands and rules to be obeyed then there is no need of a Son, i.e., need of a savior to save us from judgment and damnation. Rejecting God, they can not see that God has resolved the conflict, i.e., the conflict between "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" (Romans 3:23) and "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48)—which are antithetical to one another—doing so through His grace and our faith. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:8, 9) "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God." (Romans 5:1, 2) What the world can not fulfill, i.e., being "perfect," the Lord Jesus Christ," being "perfect," fulfilled. He, by his obedience to the Father in all things commanded, even to death on the cross—'redeeming' us from our sins—imputed his righteousness unto all who have faith in him, resulting in all who have faith in him doing the Fathers' will, not because they have to but because they want to—obedience follows faith. Since man can never be "perfect" (righteous) in the flesh, i.e., in his "self," it is his faith in the Son, doing the Father's will that fulfills the command to be "perfect" (called belief-action dichotomy—Romans 7:14-25—where our belief conflicts with our behavior), receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit—having peace that "transcends understanding" and joy "unspeakable," knowing what the world can not know. Those of and for the world, i.e., "of and for self," rejecting the Father's authority (faith) can only have hope in their "self," resulting in their 'justifying' their "self" before one another, seeking the pleasures of this life only—dying in their sins. By making "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., "human nature," i.e., their "self" "normal," those of and for the world, i.e., "of and for self" seek to make all subject to "the world" only—making those 'loyal' to the father's/Father's authority "abnormal," needing therapy, i.e., 'liberation' from the father's/Father's authority in order to become "normal."

What we have in common is "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," "all that is in [and "of"] the world." It is the father's/Father's authority that makes us different, thinking and acting like the father/Father instead of like our "self," i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth which we have been taught to accept (by faith) and obey, expecting (if not demanding) that others do the same. It is the carnal nature of the child, i.e., the child in us "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates—thinking and acting according to our carnal nature—that makes us common, i.e., one and the same in nature. To become a common-ist you must, through dialogue "recognize" your "self," i.e., your love of pleasure and hate of restraint in others (as they "recognize" their "self," i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint in you), 'justifying' each others "self," i.e., 'justifying' each others love of pleasure and hate of restraint as being one and the same, thus "experience[ing] the common ground of [your and their] existence," 'justifying' (affirming) each other's carnal nature, i.e., "human-ist nature."

"Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15

"The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will], and desperately wicked [hating whoever prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' it desires]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 No one can see their heart as being deceitful and wicked because their love of "self," i.e., their love of pleasure, i.e., their "self interest," 'justifying' their hated toward whatever/whoever gets in pleasures way, blinds them to the truth that their heart is "deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked."

There is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue. In dialogue you must suspend established commands, rules, facts, and truth, as upon a cross in order to initiate and sustain dialogue. Dialogue, which is informal, ties us to the world, i.e., to our preferences, i.e., to our "self," i.e., to our "feelings," i.e., to which item on the menu we want to eat today. Discussion, on the other hand, which is formal, holds us accountable to doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., to which items on the menu are good for us and which ones are not. Bringing dialogue into a discussion creates confusion (called cognitive dissonance) requiring our choosing one over the other in order to restore order, with us either returning to a true discussion (the "old" world order), with right and wrong being subject to established commands, rules, facts, and truth or making discussion subject to our carnal "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., to personal-social issues, which is dialogue (the "new" world order), deceiving our "self" and others into thinking we are having a "discussion." Anyone from then on, insisting upon having a true discussion (insisting upon facts and truth) will be perceived as being the source of "controversy," divisive, resisting 'change.' We are dealing here with two different political systems. One of the world, 'justifying' our carnal nature, i.e., 'justifying' our "self," i.e., subjective, the other greater than the world, restraining our carnal nature, requiring us to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline our "self," holding our "self" accountable to an authority greater than our "self," i.e., objective. "Self" is 'liberated' in dialogue. "Self" is restrained in a discussion.

"A Dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "A key difference between a dialogue and an ordinary discussion is that, within the latter [in a discussion] people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favour of their views as they try to convince others to change. At best this may produce agreement or compromise, but it does not give rise to anything creative." "The purpose of dialogue is to reveal the incoherence in our thought ... genuine and creative collective consciousness." "What is essential here [in the consensus process] is the presence of the spirit of dialogue, which is in short, the ability to hold many points of view in suspension, along with a primary interest in the creation of common meaning." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity)

"For the dialectical [dialogue] method the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws'." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

"Persons will not come into full partnership in the process until they register dissatisfaction [with authority]." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

Immanuel Kant's "lawfulness without law" simply makes discussion (facts and truth) subject to dialogue ("feelings," i.e., "self interest"), negating the father's/Father's authority in any so called decision in the process. Dialogue in essence is the child's carnal nature ruling without the father's/Father's restraints. Hold to a "Can not," "Thou shalt not," "I am right and your are wrong." "Because I said so," "It is written ..." in a dialogue and dialogue is instantly shut down. "Lawfulness," i.e., the child's carnal nature (dialogue) negates "rule of law," i.e., the parent's authority (the father's/Father's authority). (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment)

While discussion is provided by the one in authority, at the one in authority's discretion—providing he has time, the ones under authority can understand, and are not challenging authority—it is negated in dialogue. Dialogue is not evil in and of itself, but when countering (bypassing) discussion (facts and truth) it becomes evil in intent ("self" seeking, "self" serving). The child's "Why?" in response to the parent's command is in essence the child's effort to draw the parent into dialogue ("equality," based upon the child's and the parent's"feelings," i.e., their desires, i.e., the child's desire to do what he wants, satisfying his desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e., "self interest" which the world stimulates, and the parent's desire for the child's "love," i.e., "building relationship" with the child) in order to 'liberate' his "self" from the parent's authority and have his way—in the process getting the parent to 'liberate' his "self" from (abdicate) his authority for the sake of initiating and sustaining relationship with the child. When the child refuses to go into discussion, i.e., refuses to accept the parent's authority (to make the final decision), insisting upon dialogue instead, the parent responds with "Because I said so" in order to cut off dialogue, i.e., in order to prevent the abdication of his authority to the child's carnal nature, keeping the issue of doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth alive and well. When the parent abdicates discussion (facts and truth) to dialogue ("feelings"), he abdicates his authority.

"For to accept that solution [where all must participate in dialogue, i.e., participate in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., participate in being "positive" (supportive of the child's carnal nature) and "not negative" (supportive of the father's/Father's authority)], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the child's perspective, from his carnal nature] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parent's authority]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." (Lukács) There is no "top-down," "right-wrong," "above-below," father's/Father's authority in dialogue. By all participating in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, the father's/Father's authority is negated in any thought or action ("theory and practice") which takes places during or follows the praxis.

To dialogue, regarding matters of right and wrong, is to favor the child's carnal nature over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority. In a world of dialectic (dialogue) 'reasoning' discussion (commands, rules, facts, and truth) is sacrificed (rejected or silenced) on the alter of the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's "lust" for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, 'justifying' his hate of restraint. The objective of dialogue is to "prevent someone who KNOWS from filling the empty space." (Wilfred Bion, A Memoir of the Future) "Knowing" ends dialogue.

Dialogue is based upon our "feelings," i.e., our "sense experience," making "right" subject to pleasure and "wrong" subject to pain, including the pain of missing out on pleasure. (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) Discussion, on the other hand, is based upon facts and truth, placing the emphasis of being (or doing) right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth. It is the father's/Father's authority that divides us (our behavior and thoughts) between being right or being wrong according to established command and rules which must be obeyed as give, and facts and truth that must be accepted as is (by faith)—alienating us from those who—doing what they want, when they want—question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack the father's/Father's authority. It is the child's carnal nature, i.e., our love of pleasure and hate of restraint (which we all have in common) that unites us as one upon our "lust of the flesh," "lust of the eyes," and "pride of life,".i.e., our "sensuous needs," "sense perception," and "sense experience," i.e., that which is "of the world," i.e., "of Nature" only. (ibid.) Dialogue sides with the child's carnal nature, i.e., with our "feelings," i.e., our desires and dissatisfactions. Discussion sides with the father's/Father's authority, i.e., with doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth.

"[W]e recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain) This is simply a paraphrase of Karl Marx's ideology: "In the eyes of the dialectic philosophy, nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." All "educators" (secular and "Christian") are certified and all schools (pre to post graduate, public, private, charter, etc.,) are accredited based upon their use of "Bloom's Taxonomies" in the classroom—which are based upon the "weltanschauung" (world view) of two Marxists, "Erich Fromm" and "Theodor W. Adorno," making the child's "feelings," i.e., the affective domain ("Pandora's box"), i.e., dialogue a central (key) part of the classroom curriculum. "We are not attempting to classify the particular subject matter or content." "What we are classifying is the intended behavior of students—the ways in which individuals are to act, think, or feel as the result of participating in some unit of instruction." "Only those educational programs which can be specified in terms of intended student behaviors can be classified." "Educational procedures are intended to develop the more desirable rather than the more customary types of behavior." "Bloom's Taxonomies" are "a psychological classification system." "What we call 'good teaching' is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives through challenging the student's fixed beliefs and getting them to discuss issues." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain) Who gave the student his "fixed belief?" Who gave the "educator" the right to "challenge" your commands, rules, facts, and truth (when you would not allow your child to challenge them before you), i.e., who gave the "educator" the "right" to 'liberate' your child from your authority?

"Authoritarian submission [the father's/Father's authority] was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "Family relationships are characterized by fearful subservience to the demands of the parents and by an early suppression of impulses not acceptable to them." "An attitude of complete submissiveness toward 'supernatural forces' and a readiness to accept the essential incomprehensibility of ‘many important things' strongly suggest the persistence in the individual of infantile attitudes toward the parents, that is to say, of authoritarian submission in a very pure form." "Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state [parental authority, local control, Nationalism], and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

"Personal relations between men have this character of alienation. Hegel and Marx have laid the foundations for the understanding of the problem of alienation." "We are proud that in his conduct of life man has become free from external authorities, which tell him what to do and what not to do." (Erick Fromm, Escape from Freedom)

"In Escape from Freedom, Fromm offered the sado-masochistic character [forcing others to humble their "self" before authority (you) as you humble your "self" before authority] as the core of the authoritarian personality." "The antithesis of the 'authoritarian' type was called 'revolutionary.'" "By The Authoritarian Personality 'revolutionary' had changed to the 'democratic.'" (Jay) In essence the "democratic party" was taken over by Communists (by those who hate of the father's/Father's authority, i.e., who hate "rule of law") in the late 50's, early 60's.

To have common-ism you must side with the child's carnal nature, i.e., with dialogue, establishing what we all have in common, i.e., our carnal nature, i.e., "human nature" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority—which divides us one from another, i.e., which makes us individuals, under God, i.e., personally accountable for our actions, i.e., for our obedience or disobedience to authority. As long as the father's/Father's authority (traditional education, 'limited,' representative government, "rule of law," "top-down," "do right-not wrong" authority) remains in place common-ism cannot become 'reality,' i.e., "actualized." While hard line Marxists worked to negate the father's/Father's authority in society, by killing the fathers outright (publically), Transformational Marxists work to negate the father's/Father's authority in the thoughts and actions of the individual through dialogue—in a group setting, united in, i.e., in consensus solving a "crisis," void of the father's/Father's authority (patterned after the soviet system).

"The dialectical [dialogue] method was overthrown—the parts were prevented from finding their definition within the whole." (Lukács) This follows the 'logic' of gestalt, "the whole is something else than the sum of its parts." In other words, twenty bricks in a pile is "something else" ("different") than twenty bricks arranged in a herringbone pattern, "relationship" becomes a deciding factor in the latter. Twenty students in a classroom, holding to their parent's standards, which differ between families (which divides the students from one another) is "something else" than twenty students, who, through dialogue, 'discover' their common nature, i.e., loving pleasure and hating restraint, "building relationship" upon what they have in common. Gestaltist's reject the word "different" as it implies an opposite position to theirs, on equal basis (either-or), saying "something else" instead, to distance themselves from duality, right-wrong, above-below thinking, with their "thinking" (relationship based upon common-ism) being the only way to think—with all other thinking (individualism, under authority) being irrational, therefore irrelevant.

"Freud, Hegel, ... are, like Marx, compelled to postulate external domination and its assertion by force in order to explain repression." "Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure, . . . have all left man [the child] overly docile, but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic." "Neurotic symptoms, with their fixations on perversions and obscenities, demonstrate the refusal of the unconscious essence of our being to acquiesce in the dualism of flesh and spirit, higher and lower." "The repression of normal adult sexuality is required only by cultures which are based on patriarchal domination. The foundation on which the man of the future will be built is already there, in the repressed unconscious [in the carnal nature of the child]; the foundation has to be recovered." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

Georg Hegel: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority so he can be his "self," i.e., of the world only, as he was before the father's/Fathers first command, rule, fact, and truth came into his life, requiring him to humble, deny, die to his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

Karl Marx: "Once the earthly family [with the family submitting to the father's authority] is discovered to be the secret of the Holy family [with the Son and those following Him submitting to His Heavenly Father's authority], the former [the earthly family] must be destroyed [Vernunft, annihilated, i.e., negated] in theory and in practice." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 4)

Sigmund Freud: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same [the father no longer exercises his authority over the family, i.e., his authority no longer controls the thoughts and the actions of the children]." (Sigmund Freud in Herbart Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud)

"Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

"Individual psychology is thus in itself group psychology ... the individual ... is an archaic identity with the species." "This archaic heritage bridges the 'gap between individual and mass psychology.'" (Sigmund Freud, Moses and Monotheism as quoted in Marcuse)

"To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit;" (Brown) "The 'original sin' must be committed again: 'We must again eat from the tree of knowledge ['justify' our "self," i.e., 'liberate' our "self" from the father's/Father's authority] in order to fall back into the state of innocence [not have a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning against the father/Father].'" (Marcuse) In dialogue, doing wrong, disobeying, sinning is not doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., "lust" is not "lust" but is being "normal," i.e., "human," i.e., "reasonable," i.e., "rational," i.e., "practical" instead.

"It is not individualism [the child subject to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["human relationship based upon self interest," i.e., finding one's identity in "the group," i.e., in society, i.e., in "self esteem"] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority] and individuality [being "of and for self" and the world only] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx) By making the individual subject to the cognitive, affective, and psycho-motor domains only, Karl Marx (and Sigmund Freud) negated the soul of man, which is made in the image of God, knowing right from wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, resulting in man having a guilty conscience for doing wrong.

"The real nature of man is the totality of social relations." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach #6) In other words: when doing wrong, disobedience, sinning is done for the "good" of "the people," it is right.

Sigmund Freud believed "the individual is emancipated in the social group." "Freud speaks of religion as a 'substitute-gratification'—the Freudian analogue to the Marxian formula, 'opiate of the people.'" "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt [the guilty conscience for disobeying the father/Father] be assuaged." (Brown) The "super-ego" replaces (negates) the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning by making our conscience subject to our "feelings" of the 'moment,' which includes the affirmation of others—"If it is done for the 'good' of 'the people' it is 'good,' i.e., 'right'" "The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves: the superego 'unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past.'" (ibid.)

"The individual may have 'secret' thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access [through getting him or her to dialogue, i.e., to share his or her "feelings" of the 'moment' with others] is particularly important, for here may lie the individual's potential [for 'change,' i.e., to become of and for "self" and the world only—'liberating' "self" from the father's/Father's authority]." (Adorno)

For 'change' to take place the child's desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, which is constantly 'changing,' the father's/Father's authority, which inhibits or block 'change,' must be negated. Philosophy, after all, is the child thinking about how the world "is," i.e., subject to the father's/Father's authority, how it "ought" to be, where he can do what he wants, when he wants, and how it "can" be once the father's/Father's authority is no longer in the way. The only problem is, the child, once he becomes a father, restores the father's/Father's authority system in his own family, expecting his children to obey him. Without outside assistance, the cycle of the father's/Father's authority in society can not be broken, i.e., negated.

"The philosophers [those who are dissatisfied with how the world "is," i.e., subject to authority (as a child is subject to the father's authority, as man is to God's), thinking about how it "ought" to be, i.e., satisfying their carnal desires ("lusts") of the 'moment' instead] have only interpreted the world in different ways [establishing, i.e., preaching and teaching their "opinion" as the only right way, thus inhibiting or blocking others from enjoying the carnal pleasures ("lusts") of the 'moment' which they desire], the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11)

"Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity, though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow, from stasis to process." "At one end of the continuum the individual avoids close relationships, which are perceived as being dangerous. At the other end he lives openly and freely in relation to the therapist and to others, guiding his behavior on the basis of his immediate experiencing – he has become an integrated process of changingness." "The major barrier to mutual interpersonal communication [socialism/common-ism] is our very natural tendency to judge, to evaluate, to approve or disapprove, the statement of the other person, or the other group [manifesting the father's/Father's authority system]." "When the individual is inwardly free [of the father's/Father's authority], he chooses as the good life this process of becoming [at-one-with the world only]." "The qualities of the client's expression at any one point might indicate this position on this continuum, might indicate where he stood in the process of change." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) Place a child (or adult) in a dialogue (facilitated) environment, which is establishing policy, and, based upon his response, it can be determined where along the spectrum of 'change' he resides in the 'moment,'with him, on one side of the spectrum, defending the "past," i.e., preaching, teaching, and attempting to discuss commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is and obeyed or on the other side of the spectrum adapting to the present, i.e., to the "felt needs" of those present, participating in, advocating, and moving everyone into dialogue, i.e., into the process of 'change.'

It is in the area of education that 'change' can most rapidly be brought about, depending upon the curriculum, i.e., the method of education being used in the classroom. Without "educators" being training in how to use dialogue (how to negate preaching, teaching, and discussing commands, rules, facts, and truth) in the classroom the children's paradigm (way of thinking) can not be 'change,' i.e., the children can not, in thought and action, be 'liberated' from their parents, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system.

"Concerning the changing of circumstances by men, the educator must himself be educated." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 3)

"A change in the curriculum is a change in the people concerned—in teachers, in students, in parents ....." We "must develop persons who see non-influencability of private convictions [those holding to their belief or position, i.e., refusing to compromise, thus sustaining the father's/Father's authority] in joint deliberations as a vice rather than a virtue." "Re-education aims to change the system of values and beliefs of an individual or a group ['changing' their 'loyalty' from the one restraining the child's carnal nature to the one(s) 'liberating' it]." "Curriculum change means that the group involved must shift its approval from the old to some new set of reciprocal behavior patterns." (Kenneth D. Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

"The child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education) Changing the classroom curriculum from preaching, teaching, discussing, rewarding, chastening, casting out to dialoguing opinions to a consensus 'changes' the child's paradigm, i.e., 'changes' his way of feeling, thinking, acting, relating with "self," others, and the world, responding to authority.

"Part of the dialectics of the process of winning independence from parental authority lies in using the extrafamilial peer group as a foil to parental authority, particularly in the period of adolescence." (Bradford, Gibb, Benne, T-Group Theory and Laboratory Method: Innovation in Re-education)

"It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately." "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

"One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." "Few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity in the face of apparent group unanimity." (Irvin D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) The "group grade" pressures all students to focus upon affirmation (suspending established commands, rules, facts, and truth, as upon a cross) in order to work together as a "team," in order to solve a problem ("crisis"), requiring the negation of the father's/Father's authority system in their thoughts and actions.

"There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain) You do not as an "educator" have to tell the students in the classroom to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority, by their participation in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus they will do that automatically when the get home.

"To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values [Marxism/common-ism], the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes [what is called a "paradigm 'change'" or 'shift,' i.e., 'shifting' his 'loyalty' from the one, i.e., from the father/Father, to his "self," and then, with the help of the facilitator of 'change,' to the many, i.e. to "the group," i.e., to society—from a Patriarchal Paradigm of stability (establishment), through a Matriarchal Paradigm of "feelings," to the Heresiarchal Paradigm of continuous 'change,' i.e., "self" 'justification'] and he must be involved in an environment which in may ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed.... many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern [the father's/Father's authority] is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." (ibid.)

"Once you can identify a community [where people are willing to 'compromise,' i.e., set aside their belief or faith, i.e., the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to "get along," i.e., "build relationships" and solve problems], you have discovered the primary unity of society above the individual and the family that can be mobilized ... to bring about positive social change." (Robert Trojanowicz, Community Policing The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing emphasis added) "Positive social change" is based upon 'liberating' the child's carnal nature (which is positive) from the father's/Father's authority (which is negative).

"Any intervention between parent and child tend to produce familial democracy regardless of its intent." "The consequences of family democratization take a long time to make themselves felt—but it would be difficult to reverse the process once begun." "Once the parent can in any way imagine his own orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching ... once uncertainty is created in the parent how best to prepare the child for the future, the authoritarian family is moribund, regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)

The objective is to "use social-environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

In the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (affirmation) process everyone becomes a communist in thought and action (in "theory and practice"). It is the way the world is going these days. Starting out with the premise that man (the child's carnal nature) is "good" or can become "good" by doing "good works," the father's/Father's authority (1. preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is (by faith), and discussing (at his/His discretion) any questions the children might have (providing he has time, they are able to understand, and they are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his authority), i.e., where they went wrong or give them clarification on how to do what he has commanded right, 2. blessing or rewarding those children who obey and do things right, 3. chastening or correcting those children who disobey or do things wrong, that they might learn to obey or do things right, and 4. casting out or expelling those children who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack his authority—reminiscent of traditional education) is negated, 'justifying' the child's carnal nature, i.e., common-ism as the only way of life.

"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

"Nakedness is absolutely right. So is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian & Jewish foundations." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)

"Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature)

"Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions stunt human nature,... This is to say, one could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy. And my impression is anyway that this is the direction in which they are going now." "Only a world government with world-shared values could be trusted or permitted to take such powers. If only for such a reason a world government is necessary. It too would have to evolve. I suppose it would be weak or lousy or even corrupt at first―it certainly doesn't amount to much now & won't until sovereignty is given up little by little by 'nations.'" "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World, at least so far as the guiding goal is concerned. To get to that goal is politics & is in time and space & will take a long time & cost much blood." ". . . A caretaker government could immediately start training for democracy & self-government & give it little by little, as deserved." "This is a realistic combination of the Marxian version & the Humanistic. (Better add to definition of "humanistic" that it also means one species, One World.) (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow) emphasis added

"Experience is, for me, the highest authority." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over my own direct experience." (Rogers)

"We are proud that in his conduct of life man has become free from external authorities, which tell him what to do and what not to do." "All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity ["self interest"] be restored to the individual [to the child]; that the purposes of society ["the group"] and of his own become identical [loving and therefore augmenting pleasure, hating and therefore negating restraint/the restrainer]." (Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom)

"The unspeculative Christian also recognizes sensuality as long as it does not assert itself at the expense of true reason, i.e., of faith, of true love, i.e., of love of God, of true will-power, i.e., of will in Christ. Not for the sake of sensual love, not for the lust of the flesh, but because the Lord said: Increase and multiply." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family)

"Not feeling at home in the sinful world [in a world where the Word of God is preached and taught in the home and in the community, making man "feel bad" for his sins, i.e., guilty for being "human"], Critical Criticism [questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking the father's/Father's authority, i.e. replacing the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth with dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. dialogue, i.e., "self" 'justification,' i.e., using "higher order thinking skills" (which are used on material things) as the means to establishing "valid" morals and ethics] must set up a sinful world in its own home ['rationally' making sensuousness , i.e. the child's carnal nature, i.e., love of pleasure and hate of restraint the "drive" of life and its augmentation the "purpose," fulfilling Kant's "purposiveness without purpose"—the purpose of life is to enjoy the carnal pleasures ("lusts") of the 'moment,' which requires negating the father's/Father's authority in order to enjoy them in "peace," i.e., without having a guilty conscience]." "Critical Criticism [children questioning parental authority, i.e. 'justifying' their "self," i.e., 'justifying' their carnal desires of the 'moment,' dialoguing with their "self" their "self interest" i.e., their carnal desires of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates and their hatred toward restraint, i.e., toward the restrainer] is a spiritualistic lord, pure spontaneity, actus purus, intolerant of any influence from without." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family) If it is natural for the child to love pleasure, i.e., "enjoy the present" and hate restraint, i.e., critically criticize the father's/Father's restraints (authority) then the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's carnal thoughts and carnal actions ("lust of the flesh," "lust of the eyes," and "pride of life" ) are 'justified.' As the child dialogues with his "self" his love of pleasure and hate of restraint, 'justifying' his sinful nature, the home must dialogue with the child, i.e., 'justifying' his sinful nature as well or the child will not "feel at home."

Karl Marx, unlike most ministers today, understood the gospel message, i.e., doing the Father's will (although he limited it to procreation: "Increase and multiply"). His objective (that of communism, socialism, globalism) was to negate the father's/Father's authority. The "church," by bringing dialogue (communism, i.e., psychology/Marxism) into its midst is fulfilling Karl Marx's agenda, negating the father's/Father's authority.

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4

"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4

"There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25

"Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." Jeremiah 17:5

"Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment." Ecclesiastes 11:9

"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;" 2 Timothy 3:1-4

"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' themselves, i.e., 'justify' their love of "self" and the world, i.e., 'justify' their love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates over and therefore against the Father's authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." John 5:19, 30

"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21

Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me." Matthew 10:32-39

"Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works." Matthew 16:24-27

"And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:16

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil." Proverbs 3:5-7

"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:14-18

Other issues on common-ism, all saying the same thing, just in different ways; Common-ism, Turning Your Child Into A Common-ist, The Common-ism of Communism, None Dare Call It Common-ism, and Karl Marx Is In Your Heart.