Recently, in a book club meeting which I partook in, the debate on socialist culture and tradition was veered toward. Many of the ald synthetic left phrases were voiced, and it was requested, nay, demanded that we abandon such heirlooms as the hammer, sickle, star, and red flag (clearly in favour of their 'left'-liberal blue wave and broken-down aß. Let us recall that after the fall of the first statues, these same liberal vandalists sought to tear down Jefferson, Saint-Just, Stalin, Shakespeare, Lincoln, Lenin, and Gandhi. During this battle for the Communist culture (the very soul of the proletariat!) a member of the Club recited a verse from The Red Flag:
{It suits to-day the weak and base,
Whose minds are fixed on pelf and place,]
'To cringe before the rich-man's frown,
And haul the sacred emblem down!'
I am not cetain if he was mentioning it simply as an opposing viewpoint that exists, but for me this is the meßage plain, though libtards flinch and traitors sneer, I'll keep the Red Flag flying here, and if for this the liberals send me to dungeons dark, or gallows grim, I shall not change its nor my colour now. Within its shade I'll live or die until I fall.
If we abandon Marxist-Leninist iconography and our rich history of high cultural propaganda, then what is the idea of communism really? It is a stingy materialist pipe-dream unworthy of pursuit. And more so, any abandonment shall be considered weakneß, and both the workers and cadres will be demoralised by these meaningleß retreats. Retreat from our prevously distinct and inspirational cultural sphere will disillusion the rebellious intelligentsia, and dißuade the traditional culturalists from aßociating with us (a heavy blow to our propaganda efforts and our public prestige). It is like Comrade Angelo said at the last People's School meeting, we must be wary of those 'comrades' who so ardently call for a 'new way' or a 'revisiting of Marx/Lenin' et cetera, as we have seem every single time that these people either become revisionists, or were wretched opportunists to begin with just like Khrushchev (the former), Gorbachev (the latter), Browder (the former), Bukharin (the latter).
To close on the very topic which the Club was discußing: I believe Parenti remarked in an earlier chapter on the revolutionary aesthetic in nigh-all fascist movements, and I cannot be more explicit about the significance of this take-away. Having a superior fashion sense, musical taste, architectural appreciation, generally a genteel, noble aesthetical revolutionary doctrine of culture is something not to be dismißed, it could be the catalyst for a complete change in the public perception of the party and ideology.
Comments