[Dead Dog]

http://www.csustan.edu/History/Faculty/Weikart/hitler-evil.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism#The_Hegelian_roots_of_Marxism (just to see what the commies say about themselves)

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=6738

It's not so much being well read, but curiosity. Goldwater, peaked my curiosity, and probably said it best in The Conscience of the Conservative, in that Liberalism is the emphasis on providing the material needs of man (food water, clothing) where as Conservatism is the emphasis of the material needs of man (Freedom, opportunity, excellence ect). But the liberal association with materialism, and the unfortunate company they keep by that association runs much deeper.

Sorting out why materialism tends to end badly is an absolutely fascinating study, and is made difficult by the Marxist's talent for obfuscation (visually by creating straw men under the guise Dialectic Materialism, Capitalism IMO is one such straw men), and the fact that there is so little agreement between different branches of materialism..except for pointing fingers at each others mass murder.

Stranger yet, is how the occult and satanism tie in with Socialism and Nazism. Three groups we typically see as opposites or simply disassociated, but they all tend to end up falling into the trap of becoming their "own god". It's an inherent flaw, imo, of materialism.

The $1000 question is, how does liberalism stand for NOW while standing for Hugh Heffner, the party of Lewis Farakaun the party of a secular Jews, the domain of homosexual acceptance the domain of Margaret Sanger (who'd breed out ethinic minorities, Jews, homosexuals, and probably modern conservatives?

[little jeremiah]

I'm wondering about this part of your comments, did you leave something out, or maybe you could clarify:

"...Liberalism is the emphasis on providing the material needs of man (food water, clothing) where as Conservatism is the emphasis of the material needs of man (Freedom, opportunity, excellence ect)."

[sasportas]

Just now had time to respond. Wow, I appreciate your response VERY much. I went to your links. I have gotten my understanding of the origins of the leftist mindset sharpened considerably. I think you are right on in your analysis.

You mentioned the occult. I agree with you. Especially if we factor in - here's where I may lose you, so many discount what they label "tin hat" theories - the influence of the occult on "intellectual" Europe back then: such things as Grand Orient Masonry and Adam Wisehaupt's schemes.

I have read the historian Nesta Websters books. She wrote extensively along these lines. Her book "Secret Societies and Subversive Movements" is quite an eye opener.

Hegel's dialectic philosphy of the material vs the spiritual, I now see, also play a big role in this. Which in turn, provided the basis for Marx materialism. The "19th century materialism" you spoke of. Truth be known, Both Hegel and Marx were probably influenced by occultic thinking to some degree. According to Webster, it was the rage in Europe for "intellectuals" back then, apparently.

Frederick the Great, Adam Wisehaupt, Cabalists, Grand Orient Masonry, the Jacobites, Socialism, Hegel, Marx and Engel,the Bolsheviks and Communism, Nazism, "liberalism," and our present day Democrat party, in my opinion, are peas of the same pod. Materialists, yes, all of them. Pantheists or anti-Theists.

And though some of them, like the atheist Marxists, would discount the spiritual, in my view, they are also spiritualists. Of the evil side, the occultic side, of the "spiritual," however.