The Soviet System Is The Consensus Process.
What began in California one hundred years ago (1921) is now completed in America today (2021).
(see also Soviet-Politburo System)

"Has authority been banished in these later days? Has the world reached a point where it will condone the formation of pupil soviets?" (Will C. Woods, Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of California, March 1921)

In other words: has the father's/Father's authority been negated "in these later days?" (Where is the father's/Father's authority in the home, in the classroom, in the workplace, etc., these days?) Has America "reached a point where it will condone" "children of disobedience" running (ruining) the nation, oppressing the citizens. Note the state (California) and the date (1921). Having started many Universities in California Mr. Woods has no buildings (or streets) named after him in California. For a reason. The consensus process, i.e., the "pupil soviets" won out.

"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

A "Soviet."

1) A diverse group of people (which must include the deviant, i.e., the "disenfranchised," i.e., those dissatisfied with, resentful toward, hating the father's/Father's authority, i.e., hating restraint, i.e., missing out on pleasure, i.e., not being able to satisfy their "lust"),
2) dialoguing their opinions to a consensus, (there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, in an opinion, or in the consensus process, i.e., there is only "the peoples" "lust" for the carnal pleasures, i.e., "self interests" of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating—and affirming).
3) over personal-social (emotional) issues,
4) in a facilitated meeting,
5) to a pre-determined outcome—that all policy/ decisions must be made through the "Soviet" (the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process).

Today every student (from grade school to College/the University) goes through this process on a daily bases. Their grade depends on their participation.

"The peasantry constantly regenerates the bourgeoisie [the father's/Father's authority system, the traditional "middle-class" family, small independent business] in positively every sphere of activity and life." "We must learn how to eradicate all bourgeois habits, customs, and traditions everywhere." (Vladimir Lenin, Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder An Essential Condition of the Bolsheviks' Success May 12, 1920) This can be done by making the private subject to (dependent upon) the public and the public the overseer (definer) of the private.

"The institutions in socialist society which act as the facilitators between the public and private realms are the Soviets." (Norman Levine, in prefect to György Lukács, Process of Democratization) In the public-private partnership, i.e., in the "Soviet," private abdicates its rights (its identity) to the public.

The "Soviet," i.e., the consensus process silences (negates) the father's/Father's authority, i.e., your God given, i.e., unalienable rights of private conviction (freedom of conscience, religion, and speech), private property, private business, etc., i.e., silences (negates) your right of setting policy in the home, in the classroom, in the workplace, in government according to your private convictions, and even God's right of setting policy in the "church." It does this by making all "the people" subject to their "lusts," i.e., their "self interests," 'justifying' the "lusts," i.e., the "self interests" of those in government, resulting in those in government no longer recognizing that they are subject to the citizen's God given (unalienable) rights (of "self" restraint). "The citizens" and those in government no longer recognize accountability to God for their thoughts and actions, since through the "Soviet," i.e., in the consensus process truth, i.e., right and wrong is no longer found in God, who is external to their carnal nature, restraining their "lusts" but is found in their own "lusts," i.e., in their "self interests" of the 'moment,' i.e., in that which they have in common with "the people," i.e., that which is only of "the world." "Lust" and "the world" that stimulates it is the basis of Common-ism and the "Soviet" system, i.e., the consensus process. By those in government establishing rules, policy, and law via the soviet system, i.e., by the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, thus removing the father's/Father's restraint upon them, they are able to rule over "the people" without restraint. "The people" having abdicated their God given rights in order to enjoy the pleasures of the 'moment' keep the Marxist in power.

"... the workers' council eliminate the bourgeois separation of the legislature, administration, and judiciary," (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism? March, 1920) According to George Washington, the separation of the powers (branches) of government was necessary because "Despotism ... predominates in the human heart [man's propensity to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates]." (George Washington, Farewell Address)

"Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making [the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., "rule of law"], our objective centers upon transforming public opinion ["the peoples" "self interests," i.e., "lusts"] into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps." (Ervin Laszlo, A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order)

According to György Lukács, it is only through "the workers' council," i.e., the "Soviet," i.e., the consensus (bipartisan) process that Marxist dictators are able to "eliminate the bourgeois separation of the legislature, administration, and judiciary" ("rule of law" which limits the power of those in government), i.e., "bypass" limited government so they can take total (unrestrained) control over "the people," i.e., over you and your children. "The people" (you and your children) have to be "trained" to accept this form of government, i.e., programed (seduced with your "self interest," i.e., your "lusts," deceived with "Trust us we are here to 'help' you get what you want," i.e., "'to help' you remove who is getting in the way of what you want"—taking his/His placeand like Thorndike's chickens, Skinner's rats, Pavlov's dog, manipulated, i.e., turn into "human resource," i.e., slaves to be used by those now in power for their own carnal pleasures, i.e., desires, i.e., "lusts" and gain, casting you aside as waste when you no longer give them pleasure, they loose interest in you, or you get in their way, doing to you what you did to the father/Father when he/He got in your way—as they say "What goes around, comes around," i.e., "Your reap what you sow."). Thus, with the "help" of the facilitator of 'change,' the "the formation of pupil soviets" (the use of the consensus process) in the classroom made it possible for the students to share their "feelings," i.e., their "lust" for pleasure and hatred toward restraint without being held accountable, from then on, in the mind of the students making the "Soviet," i.e., the consensus process, i.e., their carnal nature the only means by which to establish policy, i.e., by which to decide what is right and what is wrong behavior in "the private and public realms." Did you send your child to the classroom or your representative to the capital to re-present your position (doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth) or to compromise it for the sake of his and his "friends" "self interest," i.e., his and their "lusts," which is 'justified' through his and their participation in the consensus, i.e., "Soviet" process, which also 'justifies' his and their negation of you if you get in his or their way. To compromise in order to "get along," i.e., to be silent or "non-judgmental" in the midst of unrighteousness means you have "lusts" in your life you do not want to be judged for. "I won't judge you if you don't judge me," i.e., "I won't judge you so you won't judge me." The compromising of your principles (tolerance of ambiguity) in order to "get along," i.e., in order to "build relationship with others," i.e., in order to realize ("actualize") your "self interests," i.e., your "lusts" is the foundation on which the "Soviet," i.e., the consensus process is built. It is the hallmark of "human nature," i.e., Marxism.

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken." Jeremiah 6:16, 17

One hundred years ago (March, 1921) a warning was sounded regarding "the formation of pupil soviets," i.e., the use of the consensus process in the classroom (in California). One year prior to Will C. Woods warning György Lukács (in Russia) explained the purpose of the "Soviet," i.e., the consensus process—the "eradication" of the father's/Father's authority i.e., the "middle-class" family with the father as the head of the home, not only in the classroom, but also in the home, in the workplace, in government, and even in the "church." Two months after György Lukács explanation, Vladimir Lenin made the "Soviet," i.e., the consensus process the law of the land (in Russia). Today (in 2021, one hundred years later) the "Soviet," i.e., the consensus process now rules over America. We (in America) are now living Mr. Woods' fears, Lukács' and Lenin's dream. How did the "Soviet" system get here? And how does it work?

"... the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws.'" "The dialectical method [the "Soviet" process of dialoguing opinions to a consensus] was overthrown—the parts [the children, i.e., individuals] were prevented from finding their definition within the whole [within "the group," i.e., within society, finding it only in their father/Father through his control of their upbringing]."(Lukács) Your children were set in rows, learning commands and rules to be obeyed as given and facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, reinforcing the father's/Father's authority in the home instead of being grouped in circles, dialoguing their opinions (their "lust" for pleasure and hatred toward restraint) to a consensus, "actualizing" their "self," i.e., 'liberating' their "self" from the father's/Father's authority.

If "lawfulness without law," i.e., "lust," i.e., the child's carnal nature (void of the father's/Father's restraint) is to become "reality," the father's/Father's authority must be negated in the child's thoughts, negating the guilty conscience, which the father's/Father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) that the world stimulates in the process, 'justifying' the child's negation of the father's/Father's authority with his actions. (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment)

"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:'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated." "The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing)

According to Karl Marx (Marxism) it is the father's authority in the home that engenders individualism, under God (correlated to Nationalism), inhibiting and blocking, i.e., preventing 'change, i.e., "worldly peace and socialist harmony." Not until the father's/Father's authority is "properly" defined, i.e., 'labeled' (as prejudiced, i.e., "racist," i.e., Fascist, i.e., "authoritarian") can it be properly (thoroughly) eradicated.

"Authoritarian submission [humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining (capitulating) one's "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] 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." "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 [having to obey established commands and rules and accept facts and truth as is, by faith] 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) The error in Adorno's "logic" is that all forms of socialism, including Fascism must negate the father's/Father's authority, individualism under God in order to control "the people."

Not until the father's/Father's authority is "eradicated" can the guilty conscience, which the father's/Father's authority engenders for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" be negated—so those in government and "the people" can do unconscionable things, removing (negating) all who get in the way of their "lusts," i.e., their "self interests," including the unborn, the elderly, the innocent, the righteous without having a guilty conscience.

"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)

In other words: since the guilty conscience ("the negative valence of a forbidden object") is the product of the father's/Father's authority, not until the father's/Father's authority is negated ("loses its authority") in the children's thoughts can the guilty conscience, which engenders the father's/Father's authority ("rule of law") in the next generation of citizens be negated. Only by replacing the father's/Father's authority, i.e., replace being held accountable for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting," i.e., "Ye shalt surely die" (that which is "negative") with freedom to think and do what you want without being held accountable, i.e., "Thou shalt not surely die" (that which is "positive") can the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, i.e., fear of God be negated.

"I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." Romans 7:7

If someone does not tell you your "lusts" are wrong, you do not see them as being wrong. When someone tells you your "lusts" are wrong (someone who is important in your life) you develop a guilty conscience when you do them. Only by negating the importance of the person telling you your "lusts" are wrong can you overcome the guilty conscience for doing them. You can then negate the person without having a guilty conscience. What begins in "lust" ends in hate. Hate is the servant (defender) of "lust." You do not have to promote hate. All you have to do is promote ('justify') "lust" and hate will follow.

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9

Your heart is "deceitful" ("deceitful above all things") thinking pleasure, i.e., "lust" is the 'purpose' of life instead of doing the father's/Father's will, making you wicked ("desperately wicked") in your effort to negate the father's/Father's authority that gets in your way. You can not see your heart (your hate) as being wicked because your "lust" for pleasure (your "lust" for "lust") is standing in the way. It is in our dialogue, with our "self" and with others, where we express our "lusts" and our hate, 'justifying' them. Karl Marx understood this. "Not feeling at home in the sinful world. Critical Criticism must set up a sinful world in its own home." "Critical Criticism is a spiritualistic lord, pure spontaneity, actus purus, intolerant of any influence from without." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family) In other words, feeling guilty for being called a sinner in a sinful world, "Critical Criticism," i.e., dialoguing with my "self" in private I 'justify' my "lusts," i.e., my sins, 'justifying my hatred toward the one(s) accusing me of them. Dialogue is "intolerant of any influence from without," i.e., intolerant of being told.

"And he said unto them, 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

Not until the individual can 'discover' what he has in common with "the people," i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., his heart's desire (his "lust" for pleasure and his dissatisfaction with, resentment or hatred toward restraint) and 'justify' it (his "self/self interest," i.e., his "lusts" and hate) with their affirmation can he overcome the effect the father's/Father's authority has upon him for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating—preventing him from "building relationship with those of common self interest" based upon "human nature," i.e., "lust." In 'justifying' "lust," hatred toward restraint (and the restrainer) is 'justified. The one naturally follows the other. You do not have to tell someone to hate someone. All you need to do is "help" them 'justify' their "lusts," i.e., their "self interests" and they will naturally hate whoever gets in their way. Marxists know this. Did you?

"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)

"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)

"Change in methods of leadership is probably the quickest way to bring about a change in the cultural atmosphere of a group." "Any real change of the culture of a group is, therefore, interwoven with the changes of the power constellation within the group." (Barker, Dembo, & Lewin, "frustration and regression: an experiment with young children" in Child Behavior and Development) Replace the father's/Father's authority with the facilitator of 'change' and the 'child's carnal nature, i.e., "lust," being 'justified' by the facilitator of 'change' is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority.

"Group members must be able to synthesize individual 'felt' needs [self "lusts"] with common group 'felt' needs [the group's "lusts"]." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)

"Only when the immediate interests are integrated into a total view [consensus based upon common-ism] and related to the final goal of the process [negation of the father's/Father's authority] do they become revolutionary." "The whole system of Marxism stands and falls with the principle that revolution is the product of a point of view in which the category of totality [group think and negation of the father's/Father's authority] is dominant." (Lukács)

"There is no more important issue than the interrelationship of the group members." "To question the value or activities of the group, would be to thrust himself into a state of dissonance." "Few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity in the face of apparent group unanimity." (Irvin D. Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy)

"The antithesis of the 'authoritarian' type was called 'revolutionary.'" "By The Authoritarian Personality [Theodor Adorno's book] 'revolutionary' had changed to the 'democratic.'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950) This is why President Ronald Reagan made the statement. "I did not leave the democratic party. The democratic party left me." Any President and his followers defending the right of the father over his family, property and business, i.e., the "Bill of Rights" is the enemy of the consensus process, needing to be eradicated if Marxism, i.e., "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" is to become the law of the land.

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

"Self-perfection of the human individual is fulfilled in union with the world in pleasure." (Brown)

Therefore for the Marxist, it is "lust" that reconciles a person to the world—requiring the negation of the father's/Father's authority in order to make it a reality. This is why the "Democratic" party, finding it identity in Marxist ideology, i.e., in "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" is so unified in its defiance to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., to the "rule of law," i.e., to the "middle class" and anyone defending it. To be outside "the group" makes you "the group's" enemy, i.e., subject to "the group's" wrath ("eradication"). No one in the "Democratic" party dare step out of line for their own sake, i.e., for their "self preservation." "Self interest," i.e., "lust" leads to "self preservation," i.e., the removal of anyone who gets in the way—a very hateful and violent end. Vladimir Lenin's speech was influenced by György Lukács writings, who wrote his paper three months prior. György Lukács founded "The Institute Of Social Research," more commonly know as the "Frankfurt School"—most of who's members, fleeing Nazi Germany (Frankfurt German specifically, thus the name) were hired by our Universities as Professors after coming to America in the early 30's. Their involvement in our education system and government has lead us to where we are today.

"As the Frankfurt School [Theodor Adorno, Erick Fromm, etc., including Kurt Lewin, who edited their newspaper] wrestled with how to 'reinvigorate Marx', they 'found the missing link in Freud.'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950)

"Our aim is not merely to describe prejudice [the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., having to obey established commands and rules and accept established facts and truth as is, by faith that divides people from one another] but to explain it in order to help in its eradication. Eradication means re-education, scientifically planned." (Adorno) In science there is no guilty conscience if the "experiment" (theory) fails, as long as the prescribed procedure was followed. For example: "Bloom's Taxonomies" are used by every teacher in education today (non dare question their use for fear of loosing their job) despite Bloom's admission: "Certainly the Taxonomy [the "scientifically planned procedure"] was unproven at the time it was developed and may well be 'unprovable,'" (Benjamin Bloom, Bloom's Taxonomy: A Forty Year Retrospect) "Whether or not the classification scheme presented in Handbook I: Cognitive Domain is a true taxonomy is still far from clear." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain) "Kuhn admitted problems with the schemata of his socio-psychological theory yet continued to urge its application into the scientific fields of astronomy, physics, chemistry and biology." (Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions)

"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 be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society and of his own become identical." (Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom)

Karl Marx, i.e., Marxism and Sigmund Freud, i.e., psychology find their common ground in the carnal nature of the child/man, i.e., in "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" requiring the negation of the father's/Father's authority in order for the child to be (become) his "self," "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience. It is only in the child's carnal nature, i.e., in his "self interest," i.e., in his "lusts" (which all children have in common) where unity with other children is to be found, not in the father's/Father's authority that divides children from children based upon their either doing right (obeying) according to the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth or doing wrong (disobeying). Starting with the father's/Father's authority, i.e., a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates, according to Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, et al. had to be replaced with starting with the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's "self interests," i.e., the child's "lusts" if that which is common (Communism aka Globalism) is to overcome (negate) that which divides (Nationalism). Dialogue (as will be covered below in more detail) had to replace discussion if the child's carnal nature was to replace the father's/Father's authority in defining, i.e., establishing right and wrong behavior. The "Soviet," i.e., the consensus process can not exist with true discussion, which sustains the father's/Father's authority. It can only function with dialogue, i.e., with the child's carnal desires, i.e., "lusts," i.e., "self interests" of the 'moment' that the world, i.e., the current situation and/or people are stimulating.

"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'/Father's authority to become as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life (separating him from his "self" and the world), "of and for self" and the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

"Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the Holy family, the former must then itself be destroyed [vernichtet, i.e., annihilated, i.e., negated] in theory and in practice." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4)

"... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father." "'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 in his home or in his business]." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud)

"Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions ['liberation' of "self" from the father's/Father's authority] are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions [submission of "self" to the father's/Father's authority] 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." "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World." "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)

"Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture [their parent's/God's authority aka the father's/Father's authority]. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Further Reaches of Human Nature)

"I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students that the best thing for me to do was to break their backs immediately." "The correct thing to do with authoritarians is to take them realistically for the bastards they are and then behave toward them as if they were bastards." (Abraham Maslow, Management)

"It is not individualism [the child, humbling, denying, dying to his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society [the child's desire for approval from others, requiring him to compromise in order to "get along," i.e., in order to "build relationship"] is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality ["freedom" from the father's/Father's authority and "freedom" to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)

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

"The individual is emancipated in the social group." "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt [the guilty conscience which is engendered by the father's/Father's authority] be assuaged." (Brown)

By making the individual subject only to "sense experience," i.e., to the cognitive, affective, and psycho-motor domains, i.e., to "lust," Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud negated the soul of man—that which is made in the image of God, knowing right from wrong from being told, which engenders a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates. Instead of knowing from being told, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority, "knowing" from "sense experience," i.e., from "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" only has now become the basis of reality. The agenda is to "prevent someone who KNOWS from filling the empty space." (Wilfred Bion, A Memoir of the Future) The "empty space" is what man is trying to fill with his "lusts," which are temporary. This is why man feels hollow after doing what he wants, when he wants in that the "empty space" is his soul, which can only be filled (satisfied) by the Father. Only the Father, through the Son, by the power of the Holy Spirit can fill (satisfy) the "empty space," i.e., the soul. Without the Father all man has is a restless soul, i.e., a hollow life at the end of the day—"lusting" after pleasure hating anyone getting in his way, never satisfied.

"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)

With the introduction of "Blooms' Taxonomies," i.e., Marxist curriculum in education in the 50's, the program of eradication of the father's/Father's authority in the students thoughts and actions, i.e., Mao's "long march" across America began in earnest. Benjamin Bloom's "weltanschauung," i.e., world view (paradigm) was that of two "Transformational" Marxists (Theodor Adorno and Erich Fromm) who merged Marxism and psychology—making it easy to bring Marxism, i.e., hate of the father's/Father's authority into the classroom. One million of "Bloom's Taxonomies" were printed for the Communist Chinese education system back in 1971. (Benjamin Bloom, Forty Year Evaluation) Any teacher questioning/challenging/removing there use in American schools today (public, private, "Christian"; pre-school, grade school, high school, college/University, vocational, etc.,) would put their job, i.e., their employment in jeopardy. "Blooms' Taxonomies" (with Marzano and Webb updating it; Webb updated for Obama's Common Core), which all certified teachers are required to use in the classroom and all accredited schools are required to use in their system is the same classification system and procedure (pattern) as is being used in the "former" "Soviet" Union and Communist China today, called a "Soviet." The "group grade," i.e., "safe zone/space/place," i.e., "positive," i.e., dialoguing opinions to a consensus, brainwashing (washing the father's/Father's authority from the students thoughts and actions) classroom is indoctrinating children (the next generation of citizens) in the application of the "Soviet" system in setting policy, not only in the workplace and government, but in the "church" as well. Bring dialogue into a commands, rules, facts, and truth based environment and commands, rules, facts, and truth become subject to the "feelings," i.e., "self interest," i.e., "lusts" of "the group."

"Blooms' Taxonomies" are "a psychological classification system" used "to develop attitudes and values ... which are not shaped by the parents." "Ordering" "different kinds of affective behavior," i.e., "the range of emotion(s)" "organized into value systems and philosophies of life." "It was the view of the group that educational objectives stated in the behavior form have their counterparts in the behavior of individuals, observable and describable therefore classifiable [true science is "observable and repeatable," i.e., objective, i.e., constant not "observable and describable," i.e., subject to an opinion, i.e., subject to 'change']." "Only those educational programs which can be specified in terms of intended student behaviors can be classified." "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." "… ordering and relating the different kinds of affective behavior." "… we need to provide the range of emotion from neutrality through mild to strong emotion, probably of a positive, but possibly also of a negative, kind." "… organized into value systems and philosophies of life …" "...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 is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." "The student must feel free to say he disliked _____ and not have to worry about being punished for his reaction." (Benjamin Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objective, Book 1: Cognitive Domain and Book 2: Affective Domain)

"The affective domain [the student's natural inclination to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates and hate restraint] contains the forces that determine the nature of an individual's life and ultimately the life of an entire people." "The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box' [a "box" full of evils, which once opened, can not be closed—once the father's/Father's authority, i.e., fear of judgment, i.e., "the lid" is removed it is difficult if not impossible to put it back on again].' It is in this 'box' that the most influential controls are to be found." "In fact, a large part of what we call "good teaching" is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives ['liberating' the child's carnal nature from the father's/Father's authority] through challenging the student's fixed beliefs [challenging the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth] and getting them to discuss issues [evaluating the world through their carnal desires, i.e., their "lusts," i.e., their "self interests" of the 'moment']."(Book 2: Affective Domain)

"To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in many 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 is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." "The effectiveness of this new set of environmental conditions is probably related to the extent to which the students are 'isolated' from the home during this period of time." "… objectives can best be attained where the individual is separated from earlier environmental conditions and when he is in association with a group of peers who are changing in much the same direction and who thus tend to reinforce each other." (Book 2: Affective Domain)

Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité:

The key to the "Soviet" is the use of dialogue, i.e., "equality" (Égalité) since in dialogue no one authority can take control of the outcome, insisting everyone obey his established commands, rules, facts, and truth (or else) or "equality" is stymied (this is not true since the facilitator of 'change' insisting upon dialoguing "feelings" instead of preaching, teaching, and discussing established commands, rules, facts, and truth has taken over control of the outcome—that of censoring and/or removing from the room, i.e., from society anyone supporting the father's/Father's authority, i.e., negating anyone who insists upon everyone doing right and not wrong according to his established commands, rules, facts, and truth, tolerating only those who 'justify' "lust," i.e., "human nature," making them citizens in good standing, i.e., "mentally healthy," i.e., qualified to make public-private decisions). There is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, in an opinion, or in the consensus process, there is only the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's love of ("lust" for) pleasure and hatred toward of restraint (hatred toward the father/Father and his/His authority for getting in the way of pleasure, i.e., for inhibiting or blocking "lust").

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11) Inscribed on Karl Marx's tomb.

The problem comes when children (who hate restraint) grow up, having children of their own, they restrain their children (dividing their children from the other children in the community because of their children having to obey their established commands, rules, facts, and truth which differ from the other parents in the community). Therefore it is necessary to have (in all areas of life) a third party, i.e., a facilitator of 'change,' i.e., a psychologist, i.e., a group psychotherapist, i.e., a Transformational Marxist (a vanguard party)—all being the same in method or formula—orchestrate the dialogue session, keeping dialogue freely flowing, cutting off any preaching, teaching, and/or discussion ("negativity"), i.e., the father's/Father's authority from controlling the outcome, which would inhibit or block everyone's participation in the "Soviet" system, i.e., in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, preventing 'change.'

"In an ordinary discussion people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favour of their views as they try to convince others to change." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity) Discussion divides upon being right and not wrong, i.e., upon knowing from being told, which is formal, i.e., judgmental. The father/Father has the final say in a discussion.

"A dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "The spirit of dialogue, 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) Dialogue unites upon "feelings," i.e., "I feel" and/or "I think," i.e., on an opinion, which is informal, i.e., non-judgmental. The child is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority in dialogue.

Dialogue ("self" 'justification') is such a key part of our lives—"self" lives for, through, and from it (dialogue, i.e., i.e., "self interest," i.e., pleasure, i.e., "lust")—it is difficult, if no impossible, for us to see the consequence (danger) of making right and/or wrong dependent upon it, i.e., upon our hearts desires. The "Soviet" 'logic' is, if man, through dialogue 'justifies' his "self," i.e., his "lusts" he will naturally 'justify' his rejection of, i.e., hatred toward the father's/Father's authority. Therefore when dialogue is done in a group—aiming for consensus (affirmation)—not only is the individual 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, society is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority as well, resulting in all becoming united in one cause, the negation the father's/Father's authority from the face of the earth.

"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)

A "Soviet" is a method used by socialist governments in order to establish policy, make laws, deal with social issues, etc., preventing local control by the citizens, i.e., negating the father's/Father's authority system from having any input in making decisions, 'liberating' the participants from the father's/Father's authority, uniting them as one in the process of 'change.'

The "Soviet" (the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process) is:

1) a diverse group of people (in this case students)—inclusive of the deviant (perverse) student (who is antithetical to patriarchal authority, requiring all to 'change,' i.e., set aside their position, i.e., suspend the truth, as on a cross, in order to include him in the dialogue),

2) dialoguing their opinions to a consensus (to a "feeling" or sensation of "oneness")—there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, in an opinion, or in consensus, there is only the children's feelings and thoughts of the 'moment (with their thoughts being subject to their feelings of the 'moment—with their feelings of the 'moment' being subject to the situation or environment of the 'moment' which is influencing them, which is being manipulated by the facilitator of 'change'—i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint, i.e., their love of the world, which includes the love of approval from others who approve their love of the world, i.e., affirmation, and their hate of the father's/Father's authority which inhibits or blocks them from becoming at-one-with the world, i.e., which prevents them from building relationship with those who, like them, are in love with the things of the world), with consensus, i.e., all the children identifying with one another, affirming their carnal nature, void of the father's/Father's authority as being the "norm." Opinions 'liberate' the children from the father's/Father's authority. Dialogue makes all children equal. And consensus unites all children upon their "feelings" of the 'moment,' with the children affirming each other's desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (which the world stimulates) and their resentment toward restraint, i.e., hatred toward the restrainer, i.e., toward the father/Father and his/His authority, thus fulfilling the three platforms of the French Revolution: "Liberté, Equalité, Fraternité"—with opinions = Liberté, dialogue = Equalité, and consensus = Fraternité.

3) over personal-social (private-public) issues—where "relationship" with self and others (according to their natural impulses and urges of the 'moment' or "self interest") become the focus of life (instead of doing things right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, or truth),

4) in a facilitated meeting—since according to all the training manuals this process (globalism/universalism based upon dialectic 'reasoning') does not come naturally but needs an "expert," i.e., a facilitator of 'change,' i.e., a "group psychotherapist," i.e., someone trained in how to seduce, deceive, and manipulate all 'willing' participants into "right praxis," i.e., into right social action—not only negating the father's/Father's authority in themselves but in others, i.e., in society as well as they "encourage" all participants to be "positive," i.e., share their "feelings" of the 'moment' in the 'light' of the situation, and not "negative," i.e., insisting that their position is "right" and others are "wrong," being 'judgmental,' i.e., "hurting feelings," causing division,

5) to a pre-determined outcome—that no decision is to be made without the forgoing procedure (1-5), inducting from personal feelings and thoughts of the 'moment,' which are stimulated by the world, i.e., by the current situation rather than deducting from the father's/Father's authority, i.e. thinking and acting, i.e. responding to the given situation according to his own feelings and thoughts of the 'moment,' i.e. living in the 'moment,' walking by sight, rather than thinking and acting, i.e. responding to the given situation according to the father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., (according to those of dialectic 'reasoning') living in the "past," walking by faith.

The "Soviet," i.e. the consensus process (with its emphasis upon regionalizing, i.e. generalizing) is used by all departments of government, such as the "department of human resource," to network all branches of government together as one (from the local, county, state, national, as well as the international level, regionalizing as it goes, to prevent a return to local control)—circumventing the separations of power (the limiting, representative form of government granted us by the Constitution)—making sure that the different branches of government are all on the same page in regards to social 'change,' manipulating the "feelings" and "thoughts" of the people (especially focusing upon those who are in government or in positions of influence, as well as those who are aiding them in the setting of policy) in order to initiate and sustain the process of 'change.' Kurt Lewin wrote: "Hitler himself has obviously followed very carefully such a procedure. The democratic reversal of this procedure, although different in many respects, will have to be as thorough and as solidly based on group organization." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change—what Phil Ring calls "a cookbook for humans," i.e., a training manual developed for the advancement of Marxism not only in America but around the world). Only in this case, instead of just taking the father's position, killing the local father's who resist his usurpation, removing the father's/Father's authority from setting policy by insisting that all be "positive," tolerant of deviance, i.e., accepting of those doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, instead of "negative," i.e., insisting upon everyone obeying the father's/Father's commands and rules as given and accepting his/His facts and truth as is, by faith, judging, condemning, rejecting, and casting out those who question, challenge, disregard, defy and attack his/His authority instead. Those in favor of the father's/Father's authority can attend the meeting, but the language of dialogue, i.e., of "I feel" and "I think," i.e., of opinion—negating the language of "It is written" (position, i.e., of doing right and not wrong) in the meeting—negates the father's/Father's authority in initiating and sustaining policy—as those of the father's/Father's authority, realizing that they have no true and lasting input in the outcome leave—are "encouraged" to leave.

"For to accept that solution [where all citizens, including parents, must participate in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the child's perspective, from the child's carnal nature] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parent's authority, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?) By parents going into dialogue with their children (when it comes to right and wrong behavior) they abdicate their authority to the "feelings," i.e., "felt needs," i.e., carnal desires of their children. The same applies to adults in a group meeting, setting policy—where they must suspend, as upon a cross, any established command, rule, fact, or truth, i.e., "rule of law" that get in the way of dialogue.

Robert's Rules of Order, when used from the first meeting to the last, and done with an honest chairman and knowledgeable members, prevents the consensus process from gaining control of the meeting, i.e., from determining the outcome. Discussion rules out dialogue in Robert's Rules of Order. As with a chain, one meeting based upon the consensus process negates the outcome being true representation, all meetings from that meeting on being subject to that meeting's outcome. As a friend (Jack Phillips) used to say, "They take your newly elected school board members off to a weekend seminar and they come back with a lobotomy. You can not talk to them any more."

"If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." "We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement [children affirming each others carnal desires and dissatisfactions over and therefore against their parent's, i.e., the father's/Father's authority]—there's no restraint and no revolt." (Rogers)

"We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." "We know how to disintegrate a man's personality structure, dissolving his self-confidence, destroying the concept he has of himself, and making him dependent on another. … brainwashing [where an environment is created which will wash from the child's brain respect for the father's/Father's authority (correlated to Nationalism), turning him against it instead]." (Carl Rogers, as quoted in People Shapers, by Vance Packard)

Brainwashing: how it is officially done. "The manner in which the prisoner came to be influenced to accept the Communist's definition of his guilt can best be described by distinguishing two broad phases—(1) a process of 'unfreezing,' in which the prisoner's physical resistance, social and emotional supports, self-image and sense of integrity, and basic values and personality were undermined, thereby creating a state of 'readiness' to be influence; and (2) a process of 'change,' in which the prisoner discovered how the adoption of 'the people's standpoint' and a reevaluation of himself from this perspective would provide him with a solution to the problems created by the prison pressure. Most were put into a cell containing several who were further along in reforming themselves and who saw it as their primary duty to 'help' their most backward member to see the truth about himself in order that the whole cell might advance. Each such cell had a leader who was in close contact with the authorities for purposes of reporting on the cell's progress and getting advice on how to handle the Western member . . . the environment undermined the (clients) self-image. . . . Once this process of self re-evaluation began, the (client) received all kinds of help and support from the cell mates and once again was able to enter into meaningful emotional relationships with others. The Chinese have drawn on their cultural sensitivity to the nuances of interpersonal relationships to put together some highly effective but well-known techniques of indoctrination. Their sophistication about the importance of the small group as a mediator of opinions and attitudes has led to some highly effective techniques of destroying group solidarity, as in the case of the POW's [divide and conquer] and of using groups as a mechanism of changing attitudes, as in the political prisons." (Interpersonal Dynamics: Essays in Readings on Human Interaction, ed. Warren G. Bennis, Edgar H. Schein, David E. Berlew, and Fred I. Steele; The Dorsey Press, 1964. pp. 462ff, 474.)

What begins in celebration, having 'liberated' yourself from Godly restraint, ends in your death, having 'liberated' yourself from His protective hand (His Mercy and Grace).

"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

"There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 14:12

To "purge [man] of sin with all the aids of the dialectics [of "self" 'justification,' i.e., dialogue], therefore, is to rob him of true salvation, of his eternal destiny." (Rene Fulop-Miller, The Power and Secrets of the Jesuits)

"These are dialectical phantasies or opinions, that man can without the Holy Spirit love God above all things. ... They likewise said that human nature is untainted. All these ideas come from ignorance of original sin." (Luther's Works: Vol. 34, Career of the Reformer: IV)

Also see the issues: Welcome To The New "Democratic" America. (pdf); Communism, The State, And The "Church." (pdf) Do not worry about us becoming a Communist Nation. We are. Here is how it was done.; Teacher Training; Violence In The Classroom; Using "Education" To Destroy The Traditional, "Middle-Class" Family. (Why and how it is being done.); Making Your Child A Marxist; Creating Anarchists In The Classroom; Marxism In The Classroom; Vladimir Lenin 1920 - American Politics 2020; The Marxist Bait And Hook. How the youth are turned into Marxists; Marxism. A Religion Of Hate; Marxism And Psychology Are In The Scriptures; Marxist Media.

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2015-2021