Evolutionists, atheists and narcissists in their own right, Karl Marx 1818-1883 and Freidrich Engels 1820-1895, rejected empirical, observational truth when it came to economics. Marxist dialectic materialism rejected the Hegelian intangibles of man’s spirit as understood by speculative synthesis, human faith with its emphasis on self, and a hope in the reformative nature of man. 

Their system of materialistic exploitation, which they conveniently embraced to advance their own personal agendas, promoted their economic belief that a perpetual conflict ‘must exist’[1] between the bourgeoisie (rich) and the proletariat (poor working man).

They advanced this belief through projection[2] in spite of the evidence to the contrary. Marxists fanatically promote this destructive tactic for one purpose. That purpose: to ‘fundamentally transform’ society. This must be accomplished in order to establish a culture made in their image and their likeness. This tactic is known as divide and conquer or class warfare.

This tactic was/is utilized by the majority of Marxian socialists in their relentless pursuit of power, prominence and prestige.  Never able to refute facts and empirical evidence, many socialists resort to the ‘straw man’ tactic’ of argumentation. Known as argumentum ad passions, this method of verbal sparring is to ignore the facts by manipulating your opponent’s emotions utilizing emotionally charged language (manner and language in which facts are presented) and external cues (the intensity and emotion by which people can be swayed, in spite of factual evidence to the contrary). The very system of free market capitalism they seek to dismantle and destroy, is the very system by which all Marxists and socialists prosper—the quintessential hypocrites and hypocritical advocates. The diseased and perverse mindset by which the Marxist relates to his world, is his religion—evolution. It is this ideologically flawed perspective of reality, that has created a world of the very rich (Marxists), and the exploited poor—a condition, by the way, existing in all Marxist dictatorships and Communist countries.

Whether we are talking social, economic, cultural, or religious dialecticism, two opposing views always emerge, with a devilish ‘solution’ ever present on the horizon.  One, the thesis, embraces self-evident truth, couched in facts and objective proof, regardless of the cost personally. The others, the antithesis AND the synthesis, seek acceptance of their opposing humanistic views from a growing, disaffected, disgruntled sea of humanity, incrementally conditioned to think and accept misinformation, disseminated from those within the synthesis, as the truth.  For those in the corner of antithesis, suspicion and distrust for the consensus builders of the group, keeps antithesis at arm’s length from synthesis. 

Antithesis seeks individualism, or libertarianism, at the expense of the group’s well-being. Synthesis, on the other hand, under the false pretense of altruism, or a feigned benevolence toward all men, seeks to bring itself to power through deceit, propaganda, intimidation, controlled media and entertainment outlets, marginalizing opposition, while secretly eliminating or silencing dissention—’the end always justifying the means.’ 

The secret goal, for those believing in compromise, while surrendering time-honored and tested principles, the dialectic is just another tool in their arsenal of deceit as they shamefully make their way to the top. There is NO WAY any rational, sane individual can actually believe the drivel, or nonsense, the dialecticians spout, since it is always negatively articulated from a standard of self, or the elusive theoretical abstractions of the majority. 

Whether argued from the perspective of one’s sincere subjective opinion, or worse yet, the context of a devious benevolence towards men, the ultimate consequence of antithesis and synthesis is destruction, ruin, shame, with its mutual trademark, the complete elimination of hope.

FOOTNOTES 

[1] It ‘must exist,’ whether in the realm of reality or not, in order for their proposition to advance and receive acceptance.

[2] Projection occurs when I speak for you without your consent. Or, put another way, projection is the idea of projecting, or imposing, the Marxist’s will on others, or believing and convincing others that what you think is what they (should) think. In Marxism, by telling a lie over and over again, the recipient of their devilish propaganda simply becomes an extension and tool of the propagandist. The long-standing media outlets in America have become the mind and voice of the Left. If you want to see what a Marxist state looks like just go to any liberal college campus and witness the intolerance, silencing, and violence against anyone espousing a dissenting voice (conservative or Christian).