Once Upon a Time I Was a Leftist and a Useful Idiot, Too…

Once upon a time I was a useful idiot.

And although I had a four-year college degree and considered myself above average in my understanding of history and politics, I allowed leftists to give me a working definition of a leftist.

I couldn’t possibly be a “leftist” or promoting Marxism. I considered myself deeply empathetic, faithful to Jesus and the bible, and someone who could trace my concern for the underdog or the abused all the way back to 7th grade when I stuck up for a girl who was often picked on, and ended up with a swiftly-given black eye.

I considered myself to have moved to the left, but never considered my newfound, evolved beliefs about public policy and more to be “leftist” or radically left. And slowly, I found myself adopting a lens that anyone to the “right” of me might possibly be a “right wing extremist.”

I was swept in–as a useful idiot—essentially allowing Marxists to explain why what I had become persuaded of as true, through various indoctrinations, smooth talkers, and misinformation, had nothing to do with Marxism.

My brain had become so drenched with the tools of rationalization, and my emotions so engulfed with beliefs of my own (and others) compassion, empathy, and fight for “true justice,” that I couldn’t have found my way out of a hole in the ground.

I was a useful idiot who assumed I understood what Marxism was, and when in doubt, quickly Googled to find a working definition.

I was a useful idiot who didn’t do my homework.

I was a useful idiot who used a skewed Cliff Note Version of what socialism, communism and Marxism meant.

I was a useful idiot who was further indoctrinated to believe that what I was investing myself in promoting was some kind of social democracy that had nothing to do with communism and Marxism. I viewed myself as joining with the vanguard of a new and current civil rights movement.

Because I believed it was in fact, about people.

I believed a lie, that those promoting these policies and agendas really did have the best interests of everyone–individually and collectively–at the heart of it all. And, I wanted to be on the now proverbial “right side of history.”

And at the core of it all, I fully believed that I was empathetic, generous-minded, “biblical” and not at all “hateful.”

I believed that the “hateful” people were all those who opposed this new thing.

There really is no other way to explain what we are seeing unfold other than to assume that most of our friends who take up positions on social media, for the most part, are well-meaning people that simply fall into the category of the “useful idiot.”

Although I am guilty in the past of sharing and promoting things to further the indoctrination/ideology of the neo-Marxists, who are still “doing the work” of dismantling individuals, families, society and the entire western Civilization to usher in their “WOKE Religion,” I do not consider that I was a tier(s) up in the category of intentionally indoctrinating and paving the way for neo-Marxism.

I was just “too stupid” to be part of THAT.

During my ten+ year jaunt as an ignorant “leftist,” I would have taken up the argument that I was seeing clearly because previously I had been a lifelong Republican. That I somehow had an “inside view” of both sides, and therefore, was actually better informed in my positions.

That could not have been further from the real truth.

While I could take time here recounting the slow, insidious progression of the mind-virus I became infected with, and pinpointing events or other people that influenced my emotions, thinking and biblical “re-framings” of ideas of justice, morality, character, eschatology and more, I will not. It’s just too much.

What I will say is that this deceptive–even demonically driven–political theology is so very deep and dangerous that reason, facts and basic sound, biblical hermeneutics seem powerless in the face of the propaganda and indoctrination.

For me, God used two particular situations to give me pause, and start asking better questions. Both of these events occurred in 2021, however the scales on my eyes didn’t immediately fall off. There was a process, but it began with, “Wait a minute…if _______ is true, they why_______?”

It was the starting point of realizing the incongruencies and cognitive dissonance I had been engulfed in, and right before my very eyes I started seeing things I had not been able to see before.

One of these situations required me to take a closer look at what it meant to be “hateful,” and the other situation required me to take a closer look at what it meant to be a “fascist” regime.

After beginning by questioning these things, I then began to take note of censorship, and other forms of authoritarian moves, cover-ups and deceptions. And I also began to take note of “leftist-leaning” friends that I could not have a rational discussion with concerning what I was noticing.

Though I slowly began to reverse course on some positions, which in turn led me to realize the need to reverse course on other positions (things I had eventually adopted simply because to remain on “the leftist side” I had to increasingly swallow discomforts of other positions which that side now “required of me” and find a way to rationalize it intellectually or biblically…), the full unraveling intensified about a year ago when I stumbled upon some commentary at a Genspect conference given in an address by James Lindsay.

Something he said struck yet another chord in me.

The scales had fallen off my eyes enough to recognize that I didn’t quite know what Marxism even was.

James Lindsay had quoted the following, and the way he drove it home suddenly got my attention:

“An SDS radical once wrote, “The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.” In other words the cause – whether inner city blacks or women – is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause which is the accumulation of power to make the revolution.”

― David Horowitz, Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution: The Alinsky Model

This began my doing my homework even more, and listening to a number of qualified speakers outlining and using supportive materials from the writings of Hegel, Marx and others. I had no real idea they wrote and believed such things. From the activist’s playbook/website called Beautiful Trouble, published in 2016, to the real meaning of the phrase “being on the ride side of history,” I was deeply paying attention, for the very first time.

Prior to that, I assumed “Marxism” was simply a communist theory involving money and government.

Again, I was a useful idiot who had no real understanding that Marxism and Hegelian thought was literally a religion. A religion without a god.

And that I had unwittingly participated in proselytizing for that demonic religion.

And so, I repented. And have been “repenting.”

Meaning, I did a 180 in whatever ways I saw that I should do the 180, and continue to do so and also undo a number of things I so naively did.

And for that reason, I consider myself now more truly qualified to raise my voice, and to raise awareness.

Now, I have seen things from the inside-out in the “in between” time of being in the “leftist” camp, sandwiched between my support of the platform and policies traditionally associated with the right.

And for that reason, I believe and hope that what I’m saying will snatch at least one sincerely open-minded person from out of the fires of the deceptive indoctrinations of the neo-Marxists and/or the other “useful idiots.”

But I recognize, some are too far in to simply be willing to do some homework.

Some may wonder why I keep using the term “useful idiot.”

Somewhere there is a James Lindsay bullet point talk that explains the tier structure of those promoting leftist agendas. Below I link some good and related talks, although I can’t seem to locate the specific one I was searching for.

But basically, at the bottom of the chain are the “useful idiots.” These are people who could not explain critical race theory, queer theory, the Hegelian dialectic, etc. They are simply pawns being utilized by the higher up, highly educated Marxist-leaning indoctrinators who know exactly what they are doing and working toward.

Actually, I have now found the episode. It is called “The Structure of Cults.” In this talk, if you lean left in a way that is beyond traditional “Democratic” leanings, perhaps you can place where you fit into the structure of leftist ideology, or, WOKE Marxism. I know many object to the term “WOKE” as pejorative, and this link gives some of the history of the term which was utilized at a certain point in time by some of the activists themselves, and eventually somewhat “weaponized” by those who stand opposed to such activism.

Basically he is describing the “useful idiot” within a structure of a cult as the bottom tier of activists. These people are not theorists. And if you try to discuss the Marxist theories in specific with such people, they have little to no interest. These are people who will not do their homework, but instead will allow their emotions and thinking to be influenced by those higher up in the structure of any cult, whether religious or political.

Higher up in the structure, are the actual theorists. These are people who have actually studied the writing of Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault or Herbert Marcuse, as just three examples. And they are “on board” with it all, and will be actively seeking converts and “disciples.” They will be looking for useful idiots.

They are setting up the moral paradigm and social structure which they want you to operate within.

“It also entered popular culture thanks to singer Erykah Badu, who used the phrase “I stay woke” in her 2008 song Master Teacher. David Stovall, a professor of African-American studies at the University of Illinois, Chicago, told the New York Times that Ms Badu’s use of the phrase meant “not being placated, not being anaesthetised”.

It started becoming a politicised word in 2014, after the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, sparked the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement.
“‘Woke’ was largely unknown in the UK until the BLM movement, but in the 2000s it was a popular word used by young people in America, especially in black communities,” said Mr Thorne.”
–What is the history of the word ‘woke’ and its modern uses?

I note that the bible also expresses the idea to “stay awake and alert” in various NT passages, so the idea itself, and the term “WOKE” is not a bad thing. I think it only is fair to use it as “shorthand” to describe the kinds of things that deceptive, leftist indoctrination is producing in our nation and world.

I believe that the current term “WOKE” has evolved into a way to name ideology that is based on a certain lens about structures. It is a descriptor of those whose thinking/beliefs are now undergirded by critical race theory and other Marxist theories regarding how society works, and how they might deconstruct and then re-construct such things. When activists use buzzwords such as hegemony and hegemonic structures, or patriarchy and “whiteness,” I believe it is then fair to use the word “WOKE” to describe their views.

While it is not the original meaning of the term, the activists themselves have bastardized the word, in my opinion.

__________

Yesterday, I made the decision to unfriend a social media acquaintance whom I have observed expressing ongoing leftist activism.

Good riddance.

I don’t have the time to see this level of Marxist deception being promoted, nor to overly engage. Although I chose to engage and challenge this person two days ago, I simply don’t want to see more of this stuff from that person, going forward.

I’m too busy.

I think my interactions served a broader purpose, which was to take the matter here in hopes of raising awareness and challenging others to do their homework.

Unlike others I’ve know more deeply over the years and have a different relationship with, I consider the person who posted (publicly) what is below (and redacted from participant’s names) to be a mere acquaintance. At some point in our struggles within the volatile landscape of politics and social media, I think we must discern when there is “no real love lost” and when we want/need to exercise more care in our responses to things we read online.

There are other people I may deeply disagree with, but historically I have a deeper relationship that I still value. And so I hope to extend grace to them, especially since at one time, I thought and expressed very similar things. If God opened my eyes, then He can open their eyes, too.

However, I said what I felt led to say to this other person, knowing that I would come under ridicule and attack. I’ve noticed in such so-called “conversations” that there is not only no mirror, but that these people work in a pack–like wild wolves who are thirsty for blood. This phenomenon goes directly to what James Lindsay addresses in the first video I shared above, called Action, Reaction, and Beautiful Trouble.

And yet, these people consider others raising reasonable objections or expressing their thoughts (that are not name-calling or speaking in derogatory terms beyond making their point with typical terms) as a definition of “hateful.” These people are so rabid they cannot recognize the cognitive dissonance of believing others who object are worthy of being mocked and ripped to shreds by their leftist tribal pack.

OK, I am also using strong terms and rhetoric here, I suppose. There is a place for this. I am doing an opinion-based blog writing which has been removed one degree from direct social media conversation with any other specific human being behind some keyboard.

If you are reading this, it is because you chose to click on the piece somehow, and I have no idea/control over whether you will agree or disagree.

This piece is not personally directed at any one person, even though I have taken note of others I know that I believe would benefit from taking a deeper look at their own participation in this kind of process.

I suppose I could offer up a “positions” paper here on my actual positions on various issues, for those wanting to know what box to assign me to. Maybe it’s best to leave it to the imaginations of those reading as to whether I’m a “white supremacist” or whether I am opposed to “any and all immigration or consider foreigners ‘animals'” or my beliefs about forms of assistance to people in true need and ensuring equitable processes, rather than socially engineering equitable outcomes.

I’ll leave it to the “imagination” of those who don’t know me or anything about me whether I’ve mocked immigrants or given my time to assist in ESL programs.

I’ll leave it to the “imagination” of the indoctrinated to decide whether I hate “black people” and “trans people” and whether I want to impose the Christian faith on every citizen.

I’ll leave it to the “imagination” of those reading how I have voted throughout my lifetime, or the things I have observed first-hand that might surprise some over my specific views on specific topics.

As a Christian, my ultimate allegiance is to Jesus and the kingdom of God, but I will leave it to the “imagination” of others what I believe that means, rather than to those who might want to tell me conclusively what that should mean and what I can or cannot support in terms of public policy, and why.

One of the most disturbing things I now see–and perhaps because at one time I shared in these views–are the twisted machinations of biblical texts to prove some worldly (and often ungodly) political agenda.
Surely history is rife with such infiltrations into the Church, and we must be very careful in so many things. And it can be hard to discern whether and when to address others simply through scripture, or to attempt to use reason and common sense.

There are patterns we must recognize about the way this all works.

For a moment, let’s consider the parable of the Good Samaritan. Clearly Jesus used this to make a point about who our “neighbor” is and how we should treat someone who is suffering and in our personal “space.” But we should take note that the parable didn’t communicate that the “Good Samaritan” was to welcome as many “thieves and robbers” as possible into his homeland in order to be “virtuous.” Because, this parable of Jesus had nothing to do with current national politics and rules of nation or immigration. It was simply a parable about an unlikely person extending mercy and care to another human being who might be considered an outsider. The Good Samaritan took care of someone who was beat up by “thieves and robbers,” and the takeaway should not be that to be a “Jesus follower” we should welcome such violent people unconditionally into our national borders, and disregard the laws of our land or abolish needful laws aimed to protect our own citizens, in order to be “compassionate.”

We might also consider the biblical idea of the year of jubilee, which some activists have co-opted for politicized ideological purposes. As I understand it, in ancient Israel when foreigners or others purchased land, it was with the knowledge of the rules of that ancient, theocratic kingdom. And these “rules” were that every 49 years these land ownerships would revert back to the original owners. So if modern activists attempt to make some point about the US need for open borders, or reparations being made to various “peoples,” through this biblical concept, it is a twisting and mis-application of history in a number of ways.

This past week, we witnessed a female bishop (and I’ve read/listened to some commentary about whether this is even biblical, which is another point of controversy) manipulate a situation by utilizing a twisted concept of showing “mercy.” And I watched in real time how some social media friends who are being used for leftist goals (whether they know it or not) jumped on the bandwagon of virtue signaling through their various online expressions.

One pattern of such people is the person who manages an online “echo chamber.”

This is the person who puts something controversial out there either as bait or as some type of virtue signaling, and then as long as no one objects or raises a question, all is well, so-to-speak. As long as their like-minded friends give some signal of affirmation and support–whether an emoji or a comment of concurrence–then the deeper ugliness lies dormant.

(Now to be fair, all humans may engage in forms of “virtue signaling” to some degree, as we all wade through the muddiness of morality, ethics, and acting/speaking from a place of deep conviction.)

But when the person who chooses to make a strong statement of some sort gets called into real conversation, we can expect to see the ravenous pack of the influencer’s specific echo chamber come to the person’s defense. And we see comments that go beyond discussion of the content or to express counter opinions start to pour in. It is as though the ravenous pack of devotees are just waiting for someone to make a step in the so-called wrong direction (raising objections, disagreeing) and they are ready to spring into pouncing. (Again, listen to Action, Reaction, and Beautiful Trouble.)

It’s such a bizarre phenomenon.

And then, there is the pattern of a person–generally who is drawing upon some sort of religious notion–who engages in virtue signaling and baiting, and then when they get pushback they turn off commenting. I have observed some specific people to repeatedly engage in this cowardly behavior. Yes, cowardly.

There is no “moral high ground” in putting out something controversial and of a “virtue signaling nature,” and having your like-minded cohorts come along and affirm you in your “virtue” of sharing such a thing, and then shutting down commenting. This is a particular pattern of behavior.

The person I have in mind will allow just a bit of others questioning, counter-commenting or giving input, and then their cohorts will come to their defense, and then suddenly you find that no one else can comment and dialogue. And the person who made the post then takes the virtue signaling a step further, denying or stating that their post was not what it clearly was. They state their post was simply about Jesus, God’s kingdom and what it “means” to be a “follower of Jesus.” They state that their post was absolutely “apolitical,” which it was not.

I think the popular term is called gaslighting.

I think it is very important–especially when it comes to acts of virtue signaling which draw upon a twisting of biblical Christianity–to recognize the Motte and Bailey fallacy/style of argumentation. This 1.5 minute video about sums it up, but one can find more extensive explanations and examples if one cares to do their homework.

To wrap this up, I will simply leave readers here with a good look at how this ugly “beast” moves, in the online social media world of influence and proselytizing/propaganda. As I re-read the initial social media provocation, I take note of the irony that this person thinks others (who are dehumanized in the poem) are “dancing in the streets” and “celebrating someone else’s pain.”

Clearly, they have no real idea/understanding how the Trans Parades, “Hands Off My Uterus” marchers and so much more are actually people whose ideologies are literally producing massive pain in the lives of individuals and families across our nation.

This poem creates no space for the “sufferings” of “deplorables” or even young children, both citizen and immigrant alike who are literally struggling to feed their families. Almost daily here in central Pennsylvania I see desperate posts on the NextDoor app and local Facebook groups, posted by working class people who are losing their homes, have been laid off, or evicted from rentals, and who are searching for people who might help buy things such as diapers or give them a temporary place to live.

I’m struggling too, and recently stood a good five minutes in the grocery store trying to decide which brand of coffee and what size I might afford to buy, setting upon a larger container of store brand coffee at $11.99 which I would have expected to pay perhaps $6 to $8 for just five years ago. (Inflation creeps up so slowly, we become unsure of what is even “normal” pricing.)

Where is the “mercy” for these people?

There is none.

Why? Because it’s not about any of this.

It’s not even about the immigrants or the so-called “fearful” people who have come to believe in a made-up definition of themselves, along with “made-up” persecution.

It was never about any of these things.

It was always about, the revolution. The revolution and the downfall of the United States of America, and the entire western world.

__________

Below is the provocation/social media post I commented on yesterday. I have redacted names, and for clarity, I will also put red around my responses (since those commenting to me have my name tagged, it may be unclear that these were NOT my comments, but comments being made to me).