THE GREAT DECEIT
SOCIAL PSEUDO-SCIENCES
A Veritas Foundation Staff Study
SOCIAL PSEUDO-SCIENCES
A Veritas Foundation Staff Study
IX
THE SCIENCE OF MAN
IS BLACKED OUT
We live in confused and disordered times. The American people
are being saturated by a bombardment of articles and radio and
television broadcasts carrying the same basic theme on race relations. We are told that the white man bears the onus of past and
present injustices against the Negro. The white man is perpetually
cast in the role of the villain of the piece while the Negro is pictured
as the constantly persecuted hero.
Any reference to racial differences between whites and Negroes
are immediately howled down by a united chorus emanating from all
our media of information. Those who dare to raise their voices to
bring out the differences in physiological and psychological responses
between the Negro and the white are subjected to such calumny
and denunciation that they are quickly reduced to silence.
The white population is fleeing the large cities of America in
numbers reminiscent of the European refugees fleeing the large
cities during the worst bombings of World War II. That this exodus
is due mainly to racial pressures is carefully omitted from most
accounts of this phenomenon. The movement to suburbia is no
longer confined to the upper classes of the population. Even the
lowest income groups within the laboring population today feel
the compulsion to move their families away from a deteriorating
racial environment. The consequent losses through decline of property values affects investments totalling billions of dollars. The
cumulative effect of wiping out lifetime investments in private homes
represents one of the great social tragedies of our times.
Officially enforced special benefits to Negroes have had social,
economic and psychological repercussions which threaten to grow
into a national disaster.
We also have the mass phenomenon of arbitrary decisions to
upset school patterns in northern cities. Pupils are transported
many miles from their own homes to distant schools and a strange environment. Strictly for the political reason of forcing integration,
the strange and quixotic attitude is taken that somehow a Negro
student will receive greater intellectual capacity and ability by
rubbing shoulders with a white student. Emphasis is placed on
arbitrary racial mixture rather than on individual excellence in study.
Educational methods based on the application. of hard work and
the cultivation of superior talent is somehow interpreted as a discriminating practice by pro-Negro agitators.
The question is being asked more and more: what force and
what authority is responsible for these sudden racial convulsions?
After delving into the subject, we find that the entire superstructure
of the new racial tactics rests upon conclusions propounded by
some academic authorities and covered with the mantle of "social
science". Although various aspects of "social science" such as
history, sociology, economics and social psychology are invoked on
behalf of this racial movement, the little-known social science discipline of anthropology is made to serve as the main carrier for
the present official public determinations on the racial dilemma.
Thus a small group of anthropologists must bear direct responsibility for a national disorder in which citizen fights citizen and
races have been provoked to distrust and hate one another.
Millions of persons of good will who had previously looked
upon the Negro sympathetically are being aroused to violent racial
antagonism for the first time in their lives.
Most people are confused and perplexed because the new racial
policy is camouflaged by a screen of so-called "scientific facts" which
bears its impressive academic imprint.
The entire nation has been shaken to its very foundations by
policies based, we are told, on the so-called scientific axioms of
anthropology.
Racial theory becomes law
Anthropology has the singular distinction of being an academic
discipline whose conjectural opinions have been written into law and
whose hypothetical conclusions have been enforced at the point
of the bayonet.
A theory propagated by a small group of anthropologists found
its most dramatic expression in the marshalling of tanks, artillery and helmeted soldiers against the civilian population of American
cities.
These anthropological opinions have influenced the policies of
presidents of the United States and the Houses of Congress ever
since 1954, straddling both major political parties.
They have largely shaped the collapse of civilization in Africa
and have affected the economic and social life of the entire western world. But nowhere have they had a stronger impact than in the
United States.
To the average layman anthropology appears to be an abstruse
study of purely academic character. There is very little in its public image as such to excite the average person, who has little, if
any, interest in it or knowledge of it, in the abstract.
Nevertheless, one book alone, authored by an anthropologist,
has sold over a million copies in this country. Today it is to be
found on almost any counter where paper back editions are sold. 1 Popularizers of anthropological topics such as Margaret Mead, J.
Ashley Montagu, Gene Weltfish, Theodosius Dobzhansky and Bernard J. Stern have reached millions of persons through books,
pamphlets and magazine articles. Members of this same group have
had a hand in almost every modern textbook on anthropology as
well as the other social sciences. They are cited as basic authorities
in almost every college and university in the United States.
The preachments of this small group of anthropologists are the
basis of Supreme Court decisions affecting the question of civil
rights which have shaken the social fabric of the entire nation.2
A massive volume entitled An American Dilemma, compiled
under the direction of the socialist Swedish economist, Gunnar
Myrdal, has been used by the Supreme Court as the keystone of
these decisions.3 This book is a 1,400 page compendium of anthropological and sociological pronouncements on the racial situation in
the United States.
This same group of anthropologists has convinced the United
States Supreme Court, and a large segment of the more literate
population, that anthropology is an exact science with well established hard and fast rules that can properly be written into law, and
enforced by the military forces of the Federal Government. However,
inquiry into the nature of modern social anthropology fails to show
any justification for these pretensions.
On the contrary, a study of the background of the most publicized anthropologists explains their fanatical zeal in propagating
their dubious dogmas. The great majority have a consistent tie up
with both socialist and communist movements. These extremist
movements require that their followers promote the overall socialistic aims. It was a foregone conclusion that their members and
partisans in the field of anthropology would never permit facts to
stand in the way of their collectivist aims.
In order to deal with this subject intelligently, it is necessary
to sketch briefly the history of modern anthropology.
As late as 1883, the American Cyclopedia, which was edited by
two pioneer socialists, had a definition which, in total, consisted of
only the following: "ANTHROPOLOGY, the science of man."4
The editors, George Ripley and Charles Dana, allotted 250 times
as much space to phrenology, the superstitious claim that bumps on
the skull determined the nature of man. Since their friend Karl
Marx. was a fanatic believer that phrenology was a science. this
possibly explains the emphasis on that topic in the American
Cyclopedia 5
Obviously, American socialists were not overly interested in
anthropological matters on that date (1883).6
Founders of anthropology now ignored
The founding of modem anthropology has been ascribed to Dr.
J. C. Prichard (circa 1843). In his Natural History of Man, Prichard declared:
"The organized world presents no contrast and resemblances more remarkable than those which we discover on comparing mankind with the inferior tribes. That creatures should exist so nearly approaching to each other in all the particulars of their physical structure, and yet differing so immeasurably in their endowments and capabilities, would be a fact hard to believe, if it were not manifest to our observations,"7
Curiously, Prichard's name is almost completely missing from the indices of current anthropological works. The above statement describing the wide differences in "endowments and capabilities" of various races of mankind strikes at the root of the modem leftist oriented social anthropology. The result has been the deliberate attempt to erase mention of the "founder of modem anthropology."8
Nineteenth century anthropological activities were largely concentrated on physical anthropology. The wide gap between the primitive Negro societies of Africa and the much more advanced civilizations of Europe and Asia caused the feeling among scientists that perhaps the reason for this disparity might lay largely in the different physical and mental potential of the Negro people. They noted that while civilization flowed in all directions from the Mediterranean hub, it made no permanent impression upon the large bulk of the Negro population in Africa, though the Egyptians had direct contact with African Negroes as early as 2300 B.C. and "represented them on their monuments as early as 1600 (B.C.)!'9
These same anthropologists noted the proof of contact with bordering civilizations found in traces of Semitic and Hamitic languages in adjacent Negro areas. It was also noted that "architecture has no existence, nor are there any monumental ruins or stone structures of any sort in the whole of Negroland except those erected in Sudan under Hamitic and Semitic influences. No fullblood Negro has ever been distinguished as a man of science, a poet, or an artist, and the fundamental equality claimed for him by ignorant philanthropists is belied by the whole history of the race throughout the historic period"10
The latter half of the 19th century saw a most extensive and detailed measurement and anatomical analysis of the various races of mankind. This was particularly true of the Negroes and Caucasians. An important segment of the scientific world was directed towards classifying and analyzing man and in recording the various physical, mental and emotional differences between the various races and sub-races and hybrids throughout the world
The path of physical anthropology, however, was not smooth. Many of its findings began to clash with preconceptions of religious, political and traditional ideology.
Socialists infiltrated anthropology
Any study involving the nature and the inherent capabilities of mankind naturally attracted the attention of the socialist forces. Socialist leaders of all shades openly proclaim their ultimate goal as being the full control and socialization of all mankind.
Proof of variations among human beings mitigated against the socialistic principle which demands a levelling off of differences to be successfully operable. All socialist philosophies have as their basis the theme that man is a mere creature of his environment. This notion is essential to a fully controlled social order. Differences in racial characteristics as well as individual variations are a threat to the socialistic theme.
The left wing early seized upon anthropology and took action to bend it in socialistic directions.
The personal letters of Marx and his life-long disciple Engels show that they were much concerned with the growing anthropological data about the races of mankind Marx busily searched for confirmation of the socialist premise that human beings are completely environmentally conditioned. During the same year that he had completed his basic work Das Kapital Marx had seized upon the work of P. Tremaux, who wrote a book Origine et Transformation de l'Homme et des autres Etres (Paris, 1865). Tremaux propounded the theory that soil and climate can change races of man. Marx observed that Tremaux "shows that the common Negro type is merely a degeneration of a much higher type."11
Since Charles Darwin's evolutionary premise of the "survival of the fittest" indicated support for a creative and competitive system of society, Marx seized upon this alternate theory and wrote that "in his historic and political application he (Tremaux-s-ed.) is much more important and rewarding than Darwin.''12
Needless to say, the name of Darwin is familiar to any school child in the civilized world, whereas Tremaux cannot be found in any of the major English encyclopedias.
According to pattern, Marx and Engels proceeded to attack as conspirators anthropologists having views opposed to theirs. The views held by the socialist anthropologists according to Engels were "systematically suppressed" by the conspiracy of silence of English anthropologists. 13
In the major Marxist work on anthropological questions in the 19th century Frederick Engels tried to upset the evolutionary concepts of the development of man and to place the whole basis of man's racial characteristics on a foundation of dietary environment.
He wrote:
"The plentiful supply of milk and meat and especially the beneficial effect of these foods on the growth of the children account perhaps for the superior development of the Aryan and Semitic races. It is a fact that the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico, who are reduced to an almost entirely vegetarian diet, have a smaller brain than the Indians at the lower stage of barbarism, who eat more meat and fish."14 [racial bullshit from a small mind DC]
Aside from Engels' assumption of Aryan and Semitic superiority the idea that racial differences are developed by means of food supply is a socialistic conception. The result would be, of course, that since socialist governments will control and distribute the food supply they will be able to fashion the human type most amenable to their socialist purposes.
Since Engels was of so-called Aryan stock and Marx was of Semitic descent, these two branches had to be recognized as a "superior development". Since Negroes seemed much more primitive in their social development, Marx and Engels explained "that the common Negro type is merely a degeneration of a much higher type."15
"Nigger" was early Marxist epithet
Incidentally, in a communication written during the same period, Engels made a comparison of "idiots and niggers"16 The use of the English word "nigger" instead of the German neger occurs throughout the Marx-Engels correspondence. Both men lived in England at the time and liked to use the derogatory term "nigger".17
The personal attitude of Marx and Engels reflected the point of view that Negroes are inferior; "nigger" was their most abusive epithet. For example, in their private correspondence, Marx and Engels not only referred to Ferdinand Lassalle, their rival in the Socialist movement, in the most vicious anti-Semitic manner, but also called him "nigger". Since Lassalle had a rather kinky type of wavy hair, he was referred to as "the Jewish Nigger Lassalle", by Karl Marx who also said "the obtrusiveness of this fellow is also nigger-like" .18
To Karl Marx the practical application of anthropology meant running his fingers over the skulls of new recruits to his socialist movement in order to determine their potentialities for leadership. He was a life long devotee of the superstitious doctrine of phrenology. In 1848, the year he published the Communist Manifesto, he subjected all recruits to the Communist League to the skull test via his fingers in order to rate them.19 Liebknecht reports that upon meeting Karl Marx: "Well, my skull was officially inspected ...and nothing found that would have prevented my admission into the Holiest of Holies of the Communist Alliance." (circa 1850).20 Phrenology was the extent of Marx's anthropological science.
Incidentally, Wilhelm Liebknecht, who became the leader of the International Socialist Movement, made the anthropological observation that "the German empire could not have been founded by a nation of Dahomey Negroes."21 He reflected the violent anti-Negro views of his master Marx.
The preoccupation of the early socialists with the anthropological question was motivated mainly by their interest in the Negro question. It has remained so to the present day, but the ostensible point of view is now completely reversed, to conform to the present communist world-strategy.
The socialist-communist preoccupation with the Negro question was never due to any humanitarian motives. They were mainly concerned with the strategic importance of Africa and other parts of the world which had a sizeable Negro segment. The use of the Negro for political purposes fitted into the socialist project of an ultimate world socialist government. Actually the interest of Marx and the host of socialists who followed him, has been predicated mainly on their image of the Negro as a potentially submissive and slavish tool for a socialist order. They believed then, and still believe that the Negroes possess qualities which lend themselves to a socialist order, where a docile and controllable element is required. There remained also the strategic value of the Negro as a means of agitating and disrupting society through campaigns for extreme social demands under the label of anti-discrimination. Karl Marx was very bitter in his denunciations of Abraham Lincoln for his policy of compromise and the easing of batreds.22 However, in a classical example of socialist hypocrisy, when Marx. realized that the Southern forces were irrevocably defeated, he wrote to Lincoln: "They" (the workingmen of Europe) "consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single minded son of the working class, to lead the country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world."23
Lincoln believed in 'separate but equal'
The early trends of modem anthropology resembled Abraham Lincoln's position in the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Lincoln said:
"I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position."
Lincoln summed up the anthropological conclusions of the day when he said that the Negro "is not my equal in many respects:-- certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment." Lincoln held that the Negro is "entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence---the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.24 He expected this to be realized within the framework of social segregation of whites and Negroes.
Anthropological opinion of the day was very much taken up with the question of the white and Negro races because the entire nation was sharply divided on the basic question of slavery. The differences between the Negro and white races were discussed exhaustively and in great detail. Even the most rabid abolitionists, including those of socialist belief, printed anthropological data showing the wide diversity of brain, skull, skeleton, muscles, nervous system and psychic response between the white and Negro races. Related studies marked the physical and psychological differences observable among the oriental peoples, American Indians, Eskimos, South Sea Negritos, and the Australian aborigines.
The point of view of most anti-slavery leaders in Northern United States before and during the Civil War was that the Negroes were a radically different branch of the human race, and that integration of the two races was not practical, nor possible. This iIJ why such strenuous efforts were made to colonize the Negroes in tropical climes far removed from the United States. Contrary to common belief, the movement against slavery was not a movement for integration. It was basically philanthropic and humanitarian in nature carried out by persons who, for the most part, did not believe the Negro to be as well constituted as the white man for complex civilized living.
In the midst of the Civil War, Lincoln probably summed up this anthropological attitude when he told a Negro audience:
"We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted it affords a reason at least why we should be separated."25
The socialist coterie reflected this same point of view in the first edition of the encyclopedia edited by Dana and Ripley. In several articles they present detailed information emphasizing mental and physical variances between the white and Negro races.26 It must be remembered that Karl Marx collaborated journalistically and scholastically with both these American socialists.27
Early socialists were segregationists
The socialistic Henry Adams observed in the 1890's:
"I am satisfied that Pearson is right, and that the dark races are gaining on us, as they have already done in Haiti, and are doing throughout the West Indies and our Southern States. In another fifty years, at the same rate of movement, the white races will have to re-conquer the tropics by war and nomadic invasion, or be shut up, north of the fortieth parallel."28
This was then the prevailing point of view among a large segment of the socialistic fellowship.
But at about the same period, anthropological research by such men as William Graham Sumner, in America, and Herbert Spencer, in England, spread the ideas of Social Darwinism. The theory of selectivity based upon the principle of the "survival of the fittest" supplied scientific justification for personal freedom and the free play of individual talent and creativity.
Sumner's book Folkways, which appeared at the turn of the century, demonstrated the tremendous impact of the infinite mass of traditions, habits and myths in influencing the course of human conduct and social organization. Sumner, however, continually emphasized that it was the unusual and creative people in society who altered and improved prevailing folkways and customs. Sumner used the designation of Folkways for the accumulation of a mass of custom and tradition Within society. The impact of Sumner's Folkways upon the Western intellect was tremendous.
Socialists were greatly disturbed by this development. Not only anthropology but other sciences began to build up evidence that a society built upon individual freedom, which allowed free play of creativity and enterprise, could bring about the greatest amount of progress for humanity. This principle struck at the very roots of the contrary socialist premise.
The socialists, finding that they could not destroy Sumner's popularity or his premises, proceeded to adopt his symbols and twist them in socialist directions. They found in the words of R. Hofstadter that "on the subject of laissez-faire and property rights, however, Sumner was uncompromising and absolute." Hofstadter echoes the socialist attitude during the beginning of the 20th century when he states: "The ideas for which Folkways is most esteemed were never reconciled with the rest of his thought." Tearing fragments of Sumner's Folkways out of the context and denigrating his conclusions, the leftists proceeded to use his data as a weapon for socialism. They distorted the Folkways data to "prove" that the environment consisting of the hundreds of traditions, folkways and mores of society determines automatically what kind of person the individual will be.29
Marxists recognize only one commandment, to socialize all of humanity under a socialistic regime. All other actions are rated according to their effect in accomplishing this aim. If facts and sciences appear to contradict the basic theme of socialism then the facts must be falsified and the sciences re-interpreted.
Anthropology added to social sciences
Modem American anthropology received its new direction and slant from a group of leftist sociologists before the turn of the century (circa 1890). It was during this period that anthropology was garnered into the big basket of "social sciences". The major influence came from Germany. Germany, at that time, was firmly in the grip of various brands of collectivism. The entire intellectual class was monopolized by socialistic theories which went under the various names of Bismarckian State Socialism, Christian Socialism, Marxian Socialism and Lassallian Socialism. These various schools of thought pushed all other considerations into the background. German intellectuals who upheld the dignity of the individual and personal freedom were a small and generally muted minority.
Unfortunately, the fashion of the day was to send young Americans to Germany to finish their education. The thinking of a whole generation of Americans was infected with the virus of German collectivism. This was true of Economics, History, Sociology, and Jurisprudence, as well as Anthropology.
Among the chief architects of American anthropology were Lester Ward and Albion Small, who worked as a team to found American sociology. They could not tolerate the data that physical anthropology was collecting which showed the diversity and complexity of the human family. Human diversity and variations of adaptability existing among different racial stocks struck a telling blow against the socialist philosophy which was predicated upon the premise that all people were uniformly plastic and should be molded into a common form.
Since a frontal attack upon these data seemed impractical, these early socialistic academicians decided to use diversionary tactics. Having been, in the main, educated in Germany, they borrowed a concept which was in great vogue with all the collectivistic German philosophies,-"Kultur".30
Actually, in 1844, four years before the Communist Manifesto was issued, Karl Marx had outlined the cultural environment concept as being the socialist key to human conduct. In propounding anthropological opinions, at the age of twenty-six, Marx laid the basis for a policy which has remained basically unchanged for over 120 years in the socialist-communist movement. He wrote:
"The primitives actually do not 'see' the same thing as the more developed races even though their biological structure may be the same. It is precisely because of the different character of their social environment that they see differently. What one is attentive to, the other overlooks; what is significant here is indifferent there. "31
Modem Supreme Court decisions relative to the question of Negro segregation sound like an echo of Marx's premise that men are merely plastic reflectors of the "social" i.e., "cultural" environment. Marx's collaborator Frederick Engels, seven years after the death of Marx, admitted that their emphasis on the economic structure of society as being the sole determining basis of all ideas was one-sided. He asked the socialist movement to fill in the gaps with a broader and more detailed series of environmental items in order to buttress up the then already inadequate theory of economic determinism.32
The cultural device was projected as a scientific facade to justify socialistic aims. Engels, at the same time, gave the direction to all subsequent leftist anthropologists who continuously called for "social control" by the manipulation of cultural influences and social structures.33
Communistic elements tried to exploit the revolt in Germany in 1848-49. Moor the suppression of that uprising, they continued to bore into German thinking by promoting a school of thought which they labelled "kulturgeschichte" (cultural history). This they designated as a new science. It taught that the German nation represented an advanced and cultural syndrome; further, that the nature of a people could be shifted into an entirely new direction merely by imposing radically different cultural teachings, i.e., a different ideology and social perspective.34
German "kultur" becomes
American "culture"
Bismarck in 1870 seized upon this ideal of "German culture" and used it as the rallying cry in his battle to set up a monarchical German state socialism, against the opposition of the Catholic Church. He declared a "Kulturkampf" (culture war) of the German government against the Roman Church.35
The German socialistic cultural method was imported into this country through the large numbers of American students who had been educated and trained in German universities after the Civil War. The socialist movement in the United States at that time was already under domination of large numbers of German immigrants who had fled to this country. The "kulturgeschichte" ideas were also nurtured by this element.
The kulturgeschichte school was supported here by a group of socialist professors, the most prominent of whom were Lester F. Ward, Albion W. Small, E. A. Ross and Franklin H. Giddings. These men were the founders of sociology and cultural anthropology as a university discipline in the United States.
Albion W. Small mentions that with the help of Rockefeller money, he and his cohorts established the first recognized Chair of Sociology in the United States. However, this department was designated at first as Social Science and Anthropology, and later as Sociology and Anthropology.36 It must be remembered that this was at the same time (1892) that Frederick Engels, the executor of Marx's policies, laid down the new line of cultural approach for anthropology and the other so-called "social sciences". The Marxist A. W. Small meshed his activities into this new 'line' of the Marxist movement. Twenty-four years later he wrote:
"I must confess that a look at the schedule of the latter department" (anthropology) "now brings blushes to my seasoned cheeks. It is ocular proof of the boldness of the bluff we were putting Up."37
This "bluff" was the formal launching of socialistically dominated anthropology in the United States. Unfortunately, this "bluff" remained largely undetected for over 60 years and its tragic impact is observable in the racial policies of the United States today.
Ross, in 1905, could boast that "I dare say the few thousand university trained Germans, and Americans educated in Heidelberg or Gottingen, have injected more German culture into our veins than all the immigrants that ever passed through Castle Garden."38
Leftist sociologists
pervert anthropology
Properly speaking, modern anthropology in the United States is an offshoot of the same leftist group that initiated sociology as a university discipline. Lester F. Ward, who is considered the Father of American Sociology, is also one of the founders of what is also passed off as anthropology.39 Specifically, modern anthropology is actually "social anthropology" or "cultural anthropology". The main reason why this particular slant has appropriated the generic name of anthropology is to facilitate by a well organized campaign of name calling and politically inspired charges, the suppression of factual anthropological information which contradicts the dogma of socialism.
The major text, cited in almost every university-course in sociology before 1900, was Lester F. Ward's Dynamic Sociology. This work was a massive compendium proving the inevitability of socialism. Written during the horse-and-buggy stage of American civilization, this work echoed Marx's premise that society was already overripe for socialism due to what they then thought was the high technical development of civilization. This claim was made before the age of the automobile, the airplane and radio-television. America carried on its daily business through the horse-drawn vehicles, and mud roads made much of the nation impassable during periods of rain and snow. Compared to today, the average person lived in circumstances much more akin to colonial America.
Lester Ward was touted as the creator of original thoughts on socialism, and the case was made out that he was led to this point of view by the overwhelming weight of evidence accumulated during his researches. Elaborate attempts have been made to show that he arrived at a socialistic point of view independent of Marx and the Marxist credo.40 This claim is wholly false,as was known by those making it.
Lester F. Ward, was the brother of C. Osborne Ward. In 1870, C. Osborne Ward wrote The Great Labor Party, a socialistic tract which had wide influence here. "C. Osborne Ward, who had read and met Marx, advocated social change through the organized power of the working Class."41
The Ward brothers had been in dose collaboration in both commercial and intellectual pursuits for many years previous to the publication of Dynamic Sociology in 1883. Thus, the hands of Karl Marx helped to fashion the very beginnings of American sociology and social anthropology. Lester F. Ward, to the day of his death, was associated with the American Socialist Society, and was a teacher at the socialist Rand School of Social Science.42
Albion Small, in concert with Lester F. Ward, acted as an expediter of socialistic ideas through the field of sociology and social anthropology. He was a "sympathetic student of Marx" and advanced his socialistic beliefs in the guise of Christian Socialism.43 He believed that all the sociological disciplines, including anthropology, should be merged into a "social science" and "must eventually be a single organized body of knowledge."44 Small was an early practitioner of the slick Fabian socialist type of operation. He wrote Lester F. Ward, urging him to tone down some of his socialistic views because certain people "would otherwise follow you very much further and would accept very much more of your instruction, than they will consent to take when they see in what direction it tends."45
Small looked upon the Christian Socialist Movement from a strictly opportunistic point of view. His sincerity was confined strictly to his socialist belief, and his manipulations of the Christian religion worked toward its ultimate destruction. This is a classic exposition of the manner in which Christian socialism has been manipulated and Christian beliefs eroded by socialist schemers.
Socialists sounded like Nazis
Curiously, the anthropological views of those leftists who laid the basis for American social anthropology would be considered nazi-like today. Lester Ward, while propounding Marxist-like socialism, held the view that in African Negroes "the nasal bones are completely ossified, so as to leave no trace of a suture; this fact is not found in ordinary men, but is the normal condition of monkeys and apes, even the young ones. The arms of Negroes, as demonstrated by exhaustive observations made by Gould, Broca, Pruner Bey, Lawrence and others, are relatively longer than those of Europeans. The difference is much greater in all the families of apes."46
He also stated:
"And although the lowest men do not-differ from the highest physically as widely as they do mentally, still the different races are sufficiently distinct to be classed as so many species.... "47
This view on the Negroes and other dark races was echoed by Ward's colleague, E. A. Ross. Ross had spanned the 19th and 20th century left-wing movements in America in the course of his lifetime. He reflected socialistic thought and associations which included the American Fabian Society, the Socialist Party, the American Socialist Society and the development of the communist movement with its myriad fronts. 48
In 1904, Ross subscribed to the idea that:
"The Negro is not simply a black Anglo-Saxon deficient in schooling, but a being who in strength of appetite, and in power to control them differs considerably from the white man."49
He also declared: "The superiority of a race cannot be preserved without pride of blood and an uncompromising attitude towards the lower races."50 [racism from where? the LEFT DC]
He opposed the interbreeding of races such as exists in Brazil, or in Portuguese East Africa, He wrote:
"In North America, on the other hand, the white men have rarely mingled their blood with that of the Indian or toned down their civilization to meet his capacities. The Spaniard absorbed the Indians, the English exterminated them by fair means or foul
"Whatever may be thought of the latter policy, the net result is that North America from the Bering Sea to the Rio Grande is dedicated to the highest type of civilization; while for centuries the rest of our hemisphere will drag the ball and chain of Hybridism.
"Since the higher culture should be kept pure, as well as the higher blood, that race is stronger which, down to the cultivator or the artisan, has a strong sense of its superiority.51
When the socialist-communist line changed on the question of racial tactics, Ross promptly changed his "scientific opinion" to conform. In 1929 he wrote:
"What makes Malays or American Indians, or Congolese a mystery to us is not mental quirk but cultural background and special experiences. Given our training, their minds would work as ours." 52
During the latter half of the 19th century, the double-standard of thought on anthropological matters established by Marx and Engels was followed assiduously by their American disciples. As noted previously, Engels had declared that the Aryan and Semitic races were superior. However, for political purposes, equalitarian slogans were issued. Karl Marx in 1867, wrote in Das Kapital:
"Labor cannot emancipate itself in the white skin when in the black it is branded. "53
As brought out previously, during the same period, his personal correspondence with Engels was full of derogatory and insulting references to "niggers" and "nigger-like" qualities.
Privately anti-Negro
while publicly pro-Negro
When one bears in mind that the consuming passion of the socialist-communist forces is the establishment of a political power whereby the entire human race is collectivized, then one can understand the various shifts in tactics as time goes on. Even though sociologists who were laying the foundation for social anthropology believed that Aryans were innately superior to Negroes and other dark races, nevertheless they set about fashioning an anthropological ideology which was in direct contradiction to their own personal beliefs. They felt that the cultural approach, according to which populations can be fashioned at will was a more useful device. Socialists ruthlessly sacrifice all facts and personal beliefs to their sacred cause. In their hands, science becomes a tool for the manipulation of society, in which truth and real scientific progress have no part.
The group of left-wing sociologists which included Ward, Small, Giddings, Ross and Thorstein Veblen, laid the basis for seducing anthropology into a leftist path via the cultural approach. All of the functions of social and political living were reduced to cultural categories. They created the fashion whereby academicians and writers on social topics began to use the terms "culture of politics," "culture of religion," "culture of economic attitudes," ad infinitum. The term culture was thus expanded by degrees to fit the meaning of the German "Kultur" which was much broader than the usual English meaning of the word.54
However, a catalyst was needed by socialists to amalgamate anthropology with the new cultural combination. The scheme was carried out by importation of the "Kultur" device from Germany itself.
A geographer poses as anthropologist
Franz Boas, born in Minden, Germany, in 1858, eventually became known as the founder of the American School of Anthropology. His parents were both radical socialists, and were supporters of the communistic rebels during the German Revolution of 1848. His mother was a life-long worker in the cause of socialism. One of Boas' aunts married Dr. Abraham Jacobi, a member of the Communist League headed by Karl Marx. Jacobi was later sentenced to prison for armed revolutionary violence in Cologne. ISS Jacobi, who was a physician, later emigrated to the United States, and was widely active in promoting Marxist socialism.56
Jacobi originally entered America as a Marxist agent. Karl Marx had prepared for his reception by a series of letters to Joseph Wedemeyer, Marx's chief representative in the United States.57 Jacobi was used by Marx to screen arriving German refugees as to their loyalty to socialism and their ability as agitators.58 Thus, Boas had ready-made personal contacts in America to aid him in carrying out the family socialistic tradition.
While still in Germany, in 1883, Boas was sent by the "German newspaper, The Berliner Tageblatt, to study anthropological material in Baffin Land in the Northern Canadian Arctic region."59 At that time, he did not possess either training or a degree in anthropology. He possessed university degrees in physical and cultural geography. His doctoral dissertation was in physics and the title of his paper was Contributions to the Understanding to the Color of Water. Another thesis of his was That Contemporary Operetta was Equally to be Condemned on Grounds of Art and Morality.
Boas' trip to Baffin Land was made as a geographer. While in Baffin Land, Boas began to apply the Kultur approach of the German collectivist thought in analyzing the native populations of the Baffin region. This theme that the cultural environment determines the man, and not that the man shapes the environment, became the primary theme of the Boas socialistic school throughout his long lifetime.
https://www.baffinland.com/about-us/who-we-are/
In 1886, he was a Docent of Geography at the University of Berlin. He arrived in New York in 1887, and by 1888 was already installed as a Docent of Anthropology at Clarke University, where he proceeded to issue the first Ph.D. in Anthropology in the United States.60 How Boas originally became endowed with the title of anthropologist has never been satisfactorily explained from a formally academic point of view.
Boas loyally reflected the point of view of the German socialist movement during most of his life. Towards the end, he became very closely attached to the American Communist movement.61
Beginning his career at Columbia University in 1899, Boas joined forces with the socialist sociologist Franklin H. Giddings, who had variously been termed sociologist, anthropologist, and political scientist. Boas and the socialistic cadres proceeded to use their leftist faction at Columbia as a political vehicle.
During that general period, Columbia University had a well established nest of socialists and socialistic partisans among the faculty. They worked together as a close and well-knit group. Included in this group were Charles A. Beard and James Harvey Robinson, historians, E.R.A Seligman, economist, and John Dewey.62 Dewey was touted as an educational philosopher. He developed the collectivistic system of education which was dubbed "progressive education". Socialist indoctrination under this label has infected American school systems for almost two generations.63
Leftists cluster at Columbia
Boas, with decades of socialist experience behind him, having learned the socialist credo at his mother's knee, used all the accumulated skill garnered from the German socialist movement to manipulate anthropology away from its physical aspects into the cultural environment theory. His socialistic cohorts at Columbia and other universities throughout the nation then extended this cultural socialistic concept into other disciplines, such as history, economics, sociology, political science, philosophy, and almost every other department having to do with social studies.
The Boas project was buttressed by reference books written by the Beard School in history, the Ross School in sociology, The Seligman school in economics, the Morris Cohen school in jurisprudence, and the John Dewey group in the philosophy of education.
The socialist coterie, operating with the prestige and respectability of their academic titles, began to promote one another's works through book reviews, educational manuals and required reading lists. All this has been continued to the present day, under the banner of individual thought and intellectual freedom. This basic dishonesty has been responsible for the tremendous success of the socialistic permeation of our social life. The Boas fellowship were past masters in this technique. Today there are hopeful signs of rebellion against this deception by a growing number of scientists and educators.
In anthropology, as in the other social sciences, the impression has deliberately been created by its manipulators that collectivistic lor socialistic conclusions have been arrived at due to an overwhelming mass of scientific evidence pointing toward the inevitable triumph of socialism. The fact is that in almost every case, the personalities involved were socialists first, and applied themselves to various academic and scientific fields merely to use these as transmission belts for socialist purposes.
The Boas group was not satisfied with merely infecting the academic world with the environmental theory dressed up in cultural garb. They proceeded to enter into direct radical activity outside the educational field.
NAACP formed as a socialist front
In 1909 a group of socialists and socialist sympathizers founded a socialist Negro front organization which they labelled the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The two prime movers of the organization, Mary White Ovington and William English Walling were prominent white socialists.64 These two were also key members of the Fabian socialist organization in the United States which went under the name of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society (later called the League for Industrial Democracy).65
The NAACP was strictly a Socialist Party front of white radicals designed to push through measures based on demands for Negro rights which would aid in conditioning the United States for a socialistic society. 66
A few years previously, a parallel organization was organized of Negroes headed by W. E. B. Du Bois, a Harvard educated Negro socialist. This movement was termed the Niagara Movement, named after the locale of its organization at Niagara Falls, Canada.
The function of Du Bois and his group was to destroy the effectiveness of the great Negro leader Booker T. Washington. Washington had espoused the philosophy of Negro self-help and self-development in the trades and professions as a means of lifting Negroes into a higher economic and cultural level. The socialist controlled Niagara movement was quite successful in torpedoing the Booker T. Washington program.67 It was obvious that any successful self-development movement among Negroes would strengthen the present private enterprise system rather than weaken it. The socialist premise has always been to weaken the social order so as to render it easier for the final take-over. This is a fundamental long-range principle of over-all socialistic strategy. Later when the communists split off from the socialist movement they pursued this objective with added vigor.
By 1910, the socialists decided to merge the remnants of the Niagara movement into the NAACP. Thus was launched the full fledged organization of the NAACP as a socialist front among the Negroes.
Contrary to common opinion held by both laymen and experts alike, the notion of radical fronts was not invented by Bolshevik communists. The communists merely carried over an old Marxist device. The socialist movement had utilized deceptive fronts for at least 70 years previous to the launching of the NAACP.
Radical fronts an old tactic
Karl Marx's disciple Engels, wrote in 1885:
"As early as February 7, 1840, the legally functioning German Workers' Educational Association, which still exists was founded. The Association served the League as a recruiting ground for new members, and since, as always, the communists were the most active and intelligent members of the Association, it was a matter of course that its leadership lay entirely in the hands of the League. The League soon had several communities, or, as they were then still called 'lodges', in London. The same obvious tactics were followed in Switzerland and els&- where. Where workers' associations could be founded, they were utilized in like manner. Where this was forbidden by law, one joined choral societies, athletic clubs,and the like. Connections were to a large extent maintained by members who were continually travelling back and forth; they also, when required, served as emissaries."68
The NAACP, the American Civil Liberties Union, and scores of other socialist front groups, were launched precisely in the same manner that the 19th century Marxist socialist fronts were created, beginning as early as 8 years before the publication of the 1848 Communist Manifesto.
The NAACP was consistently embarrassed by the fact of the extreme scarcity of Negro membership. Finally, W. E. B. Du Bois was ensconced in the national office of the NAACP as an editor of its magazine The Crisis. He was proudly displayed as a literary Negro conversation piece by the white socialist leaders of the NAACP. Franz Boas was enlisted by the socialists to furnish the anthropological justification for NAACP activity among the Negroes. He worked out a very revealing program which laid the basis for anthropology not only in the NAACP, but also in anthropological teaching throughout the United States. In order to pave the way for the cultural environment theory as the dominant molder of mankind, he had to explain away many salient facts of physical anthropology. He admitted that:
"The anthropologist recognizes that the Negro and the white represent the two most divergent types of mankind."
He also stated:
"It is true that the average size of the Negro brain is slightly smaller than the average size of the brain of the white race."
Socialists planned racial mixture
Over 50 years ago Boas concluded that the real solution of the Negro problem in this country would be full racial mixture and a final blending of the population.69
In 1963, a President of the United States took the identical position. 70
Boas busied himself with giving a professorial tone to the NAACP movement. The nation began to be bombarded by a barrage of so-called scientific opinion on the racial question. The major theme projected was that there are no fundamental differences among races. This particularly was applied to the Negro and white races. There was constant repetition that all mankind was cast from the same mold. Only some mysterious compound called the culture complex was said to create differences. For example, Boas would team up with Mary White Ovington in a book which emphasized that the only major differences between the white and Negro races are those of cultural environment. A whole bevy of transitory socialist fronts were created. One example was the Greenwich House Committee on social investigation (circa 1911). This committee sponsored the book written by Mary White Ovington of the NAACP with a foreword by Franz Boas.71
The Greenwich House Committee numbered among its directors such socialists names as E. R. A. Seligman, chairman, Franz Boas, Franklin H. Giddings and Mary White Ovington. The tentacles of this fellowship reached from the Socialist Party and the League for Industrial Democracy (Fabian) into the NAACP and the National Urban League. Thus, a small well-knit group, largely unopposed and undetected, managed WIder the cover of scientific auspices to spread its socialistic ideas and tactics throughout the entire nation.
In the course of a few decades the well-organized Boas leftist anthropological phalanx had managed to cripple physical anthropology as a scientific discipline. This was done by degrees. The early works of Boas began with a mixture of the cultural approach with anthropometric and biological data about the different races. Little by little, the physical aspects of anthropology were pushed into the background through ridicule and politically inspired charges. By the time Hitler rose to power, the socialists throughout the world, and the Boas group particularly, began to apply epithets of "racism" and "genocide" to those who endeavored to carry on scientific studies of the various races and sub-races of humankind. They were helped greatly by Hitler's use of the racial theme to excuse his inhumanities.
The Nazi preoccupation with the theory of Aryan "superiority" to justify their massacres of millions of innocent civilians was cited in literature, speeches, university lectures and newspapers, as the reason for damning all physical investigations into racial differences. By almost imperceptible degrees the Boas leftist school, which was made up of both socialist and communist partisans, began to create the impression that the Aryan "superiority" theory was a Fascistic abomination and invention.
Communist sources rejoiced that "Boas' teachings on race have thus provided a powerful ideological instrument" and that his group "offered scientific evidence to refute Nazi racialism and the cults of 'Nordicism' and 'Aryanism' ".72
Socialists pioneered "Aryan superiority"
Socialists and communists pretend that the concept of Aryan "superiority" springs strictly from Nazi and Fascist sources. Socialists would have the world forget that for several decades in the 19th century they themselves toyed with the idea of using the theory of Aryan "superiority"as a means of selling socialism to the public. We have noted previously that Karl Marx's colleague Friedrich Engels spoke of "the superior development of Aryans"73
Actually, the term "Aryan" as related to a racial stock is completely misplaced and has been known to be so for over 100 years. "Aryan" can only be applied philologically,-to a relationship of languages and not of race. In 1858 it was estimated that 45 nations covering several continents were connected by language similarities which could be termed Aryan.74
In the 19th century, it was well known that the term "Arya" or "Aryan" originally described a group of people who occupied Western and South-Western Asia in remote antiquity. Their descendants today can be found in the Himalayas, Eastern India and Iran. The false and unscientific designation as "Aryan" of peoples speaking Germanic languages has helped to inflict the horrors of concentration camps and gas chambers on millions of people.
Actually, socialists were among the pioneers in spreading the ideas of the superiority of "Aryans" as a racial category. Historically they must take the major blame for preparing the German mind for the Hitlerian atrocities. They steadily advocated Aryan "superiority" in Germany. We have noted before the discrepancy between Marx's public views on anthropological matters and his personal and private bias, not only against the Negro, but against other races as well. Spiro, in an exhaustive work on the subject, writes:
"The name of Utin serves to bring up the national scale in Marx's and Engels' private ideology. With them, of course, the Germans stood above all nations and races. Next came the Turks, French, British, Italians, Magyars and others. Near the bottom of the scale they placed the Russians, still lower, the Southern Slavs, and beneath all the Jews. However, a Jew who worked closely with them was cleared of the 'stigma' and won for himself the title of the nationality of the country in which he was brought Up."75
Other socialists, however, were not so circumspect in separating their private from their public views. There is voluminous evidence of extensive "Aryan Superiority" writings and speeches by socialists of the 19th, as well as the beginning of the 20th century. We will list a few which were the most dramatic and were translated into the major languages of Europe.
Albert Regnard, famous French socialist, who had been Secretary General of the Paris Police under the bloody Paris Commune of 1871, was an active promoter of "Aryan superiority" as a means of building socialism. In a propaganda piece he claimed "to prove scientifically the superiority of the Aryans, the only race that is able to prepare 'social renovation'''. 76 Regnard laid the basis for Hitler's concept by insisting that the Aryan race "is the only race to possess the notions of justice, liberty and beauty. All real Science is of Aryan origin. Scientific Socialism is a 'Franco-Germanic creation, i.e., Aryan in the strongest meaning of the term".77 Regnard also categorized the "Jewish race" as "deplorably inferior". [hmm,that word sounds familiar DC]
In 1888, Gustav Rouanet, another leading socialist, also publicly brought in the question of Aryan superiority and expressed the belief "that the Aryans are culturally superior to the Semites." Like Hitler, Rouanet identified the struggle between capitalists and workers as being basically one "between Aryans and Semites".78
The "Aryan superiority" theme raised its head again in the socialist movement in 1898 when Edmund Picard, a prominent Belgian socialist and socialist member of the Belgian Senate, wrote a socialist book entitled L'Aryano-Semitisme. In this book he tried "to synthesize both anti-Semitism and socialism". He wrote "that the antagonism between the Semitic race and the Aryan race is as old as the co-existence of the two races." Picard stated that, ."the Semite in general, and the Jew in particular, is a parasite", and that "preference in everything must be given to Aryans". He took the position that "socialism seeks to abolish social injustice with respect to all workers, Aryans, Jews, Negroes and Mongols. Scientific and humanitarian anti-Semitism is by no means opposed to this final aim of socialism, but the fraternity of the oppressed does not imply an identical status for various races within one and the same civilization, nor the admission of one race to the direction of the affairs of another, nor assimilation of different races."79
The "Aryan" theme ran through the socialist movement for many years. For example, in 1933, Shaw's advice to solve the Jewish problem in Germany was "force the Jews to wed Aryans".80
Leftists laid groundwork for Hitler
Much has been said and written of the Nazi use of the Aryan theory to perpetrate the crimes of genocide against innocent millions. However, the fact must be noted that if the European socialists had not for several preceding generations intentionally twisted and distorted the scientific study of anthropology, and had not themselves spread the concept of "Aryan superiority", it is doubtful that Hitler and his minions could have received such mass support for the savage treatment of various racial and ethnic groups.
The socialist-communist syndrome today has extended and intensified distortions in the racial field. This is particularly true of information flowing out of many American academic sources. Men of good will can only hope that the result will not be to furnish grist for the mill in some future acts of racially inspired savagery.
In the United States, also, after the Civil War, the socialists espoused Aryan "superiority" through the Populist movement and in the universities. At the tum of the century the socialist sociologist E. A. Ross ascribed to the Germanic or Aryan element the inherent characteristics of "noble virtues", and "ambition", and credited them with being "more enterprising" and possessing greater "honor and self-respect" than "the more outward-looking sensuous peoples of the South."81
German immigrants, during the same period, reflected a strong tradition of Aryan superiority. The socialist movement was primarily Germanic in content at that time.
Victor Berger led the German elements in the Socialist Party of America, and strongly reflected the Aryan credo. Berger, who was elected to Congress on the Socialist ticket in 1911, catered to the prevailing Northern attitude on the Negro by describing him as "inferior". He also reflected the socialists' attitude in the United States relative to "inferior races", including the Negro. He wrote:
"There can be no doubt that the negroes and mulattoes constitute a lower race-that the Caucasian and indeed even the Mongolian have the start on them in civilization by many thousand years----so that negroes will "find it difficult to ever overtake them. The many cases of rape which occur wherever negroes are settled in large numbers prove, moreover, that the free contact with the whites has led to the further degeneration of the negroes, as well as all other inferior races."82
U.S. radicals advocated
socialist segregation
A booklet written by John M. Work, national secretary of the Socialist Party of America, published in 1905, asked the question: "What are we socialists going to do with the Negro?" He gave an equivocal answer by stating:
" . . . Socialism will release you from having to associate with black people if they are disagreeable to you. It will also release the negroes from having to associate with white people."
"Under present conditions the negroes and whites are compelled to live in the same localities because the negroes work for the whites.
"Under socialism, it will be entirely feasible for the negroes to live in localities by themselves, if they so desire, and run the public industries of those localities. Since the negroes as a rule do not like to associate with the whites, but prefer the company of their own people, it is probable that when socialism makes their voluntary segregation possible, they will take advantage of it...."
The promise of socialist segregation of the races was an application of socialist tactics to prevailing conditions. It catered to the then prevailing'views on the racial question among the white population in the North.
During the same period, the Boas group was busily creating an entirely new approach to the question of race relations. Their master strategy called for gradually persuading the American population to accept complete social and economic integration, including the intermarriage of the Negro and white races, This was a long range project. It crept forward under the cover of "science." This was one of the most successful socialistic maneuvers of our time, leading directly to the present racial turmoil,
The socialist-communist propagandists on the race question have attributed most of the "Aryan superiority" thinking of the Nazis to two 19th century writers. They were J. A. Gobineau (1816- 1882) and Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855-1927) who wrote works relating to "Aryan superiority" during the 19th century.84
"The organized world presents no contrast and resemblances more remarkable than those which we discover on comparing mankind with the inferior tribes. That creatures should exist so nearly approaching to each other in all the particulars of their physical structure, and yet differing so immeasurably in their endowments and capabilities, would be a fact hard to believe, if it were not manifest to our observations,"7
Curiously, Prichard's name is almost completely missing from the indices of current anthropological works. The above statement describing the wide differences in "endowments and capabilities" of various races of mankind strikes at the root of the modem leftist oriented social anthropology. The result has been the deliberate attempt to erase mention of the "founder of modem anthropology."8
Nineteenth century anthropological activities were largely concentrated on physical anthropology. The wide gap between the primitive Negro societies of Africa and the much more advanced civilizations of Europe and Asia caused the feeling among scientists that perhaps the reason for this disparity might lay largely in the different physical and mental potential of the Negro people. They noted that while civilization flowed in all directions from the Mediterranean hub, it made no permanent impression upon the large bulk of the Negro population in Africa, though the Egyptians had direct contact with African Negroes as early as 2300 B.C. and "represented them on their monuments as early as 1600 (B.C.)!'9
These same anthropologists noted the proof of contact with bordering civilizations found in traces of Semitic and Hamitic languages in adjacent Negro areas. It was also noted that "architecture has no existence, nor are there any monumental ruins or stone structures of any sort in the whole of Negroland except those erected in Sudan under Hamitic and Semitic influences. No fullblood Negro has ever been distinguished as a man of science, a poet, or an artist, and the fundamental equality claimed for him by ignorant philanthropists is belied by the whole history of the race throughout the historic period"10
The latter half of the 19th century saw a most extensive and detailed measurement and anatomical analysis of the various races of mankind. This was particularly true of the Negroes and Caucasians. An important segment of the scientific world was directed towards classifying and analyzing man and in recording the various physical, mental and emotional differences between the various races and sub-races and hybrids throughout the world
The path of physical anthropology, however, was not smooth. Many of its findings began to clash with preconceptions of religious, political and traditional ideology.
Socialists infiltrated anthropology
Any study involving the nature and the inherent capabilities of mankind naturally attracted the attention of the socialist forces. Socialist leaders of all shades openly proclaim their ultimate goal as being the full control and socialization of all mankind.
Proof of variations among human beings mitigated against the socialistic principle which demands a levelling off of differences to be successfully operable. All socialist philosophies have as their basis the theme that man is a mere creature of his environment. This notion is essential to a fully controlled social order. Differences in racial characteristics as well as individual variations are a threat to the socialistic theme.
The left wing early seized upon anthropology and took action to bend it in socialistic directions.
The personal letters of Marx and his life-long disciple Engels show that they were much concerned with the growing anthropological data about the races of mankind Marx busily searched for confirmation of the socialist premise that human beings are completely environmentally conditioned. During the same year that he had completed his basic work Das Kapital Marx had seized upon the work of P. Tremaux, who wrote a book Origine et Transformation de l'Homme et des autres Etres (Paris, 1865). Tremaux propounded the theory that soil and climate can change races of man. Marx observed that Tremaux "shows that the common Negro type is merely a degeneration of a much higher type."11
Since Charles Darwin's evolutionary premise of the "survival of the fittest" indicated support for a creative and competitive system of society, Marx seized upon this alternate theory and wrote that "in his historic and political application he (Tremaux-s-ed.) is much more important and rewarding than Darwin.''12
Needless to say, the name of Darwin is familiar to any school child in the civilized world, whereas Tremaux cannot be found in any of the major English encyclopedias.
According to pattern, Marx and Engels proceeded to attack as conspirators anthropologists having views opposed to theirs. The views held by the socialist anthropologists according to Engels were "systematically suppressed" by the conspiracy of silence of English anthropologists. 13
In the major Marxist work on anthropological questions in the 19th century Frederick Engels tried to upset the evolutionary concepts of the development of man and to place the whole basis of man's racial characteristics on a foundation of dietary environment.
He wrote:
"The plentiful supply of milk and meat and especially the beneficial effect of these foods on the growth of the children account perhaps for the superior development of the Aryan and Semitic races. It is a fact that the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico, who are reduced to an almost entirely vegetarian diet, have a smaller brain than the Indians at the lower stage of barbarism, who eat more meat and fish."14 [racial bullshit from a small mind DC]
Aside from Engels' assumption of Aryan and Semitic superiority the idea that racial differences are developed by means of food supply is a socialistic conception. The result would be, of course, that since socialist governments will control and distribute the food supply they will be able to fashion the human type most amenable to their socialist purposes.
Since Engels was of so-called Aryan stock and Marx was of Semitic descent, these two branches had to be recognized as a "superior development". Since Negroes seemed much more primitive in their social development, Marx and Engels explained "that the common Negro type is merely a degeneration of a much higher type."15
"Nigger" was early Marxist epithet
Incidentally, in a communication written during the same period, Engels made a comparison of "idiots and niggers"16 The use of the English word "nigger" instead of the German neger occurs throughout the Marx-Engels correspondence. Both men lived in England at the time and liked to use the derogatory term "nigger".17
The personal attitude of Marx and Engels reflected the point of view that Negroes are inferior; "nigger" was their most abusive epithet. For example, in their private correspondence, Marx and Engels not only referred to Ferdinand Lassalle, their rival in the Socialist movement, in the most vicious anti-Semitic manner, but also called him "nigger". Since Lassalle had a rather kinky type of wavy hair, he was referred to as "the Jewish Nigger Lassalle", by Karl Marx who also said "the obtrusiveness of this fellow is also nigger-like" .18
To Karl Marx the practical application of anthropology meant running his fingers over the skulls of new recruits to his socialist movement in order to determine their potentialities for leadership. He was a life long devotee of the superstitious doctrine of phrenology. In 1848, the year he published the Communist Manifesto, he subjected all recruits to the Communist League to the skull test via his fingers in order to rate them.19 Liebknecht reports that upon meeting Karl Marx: "Well, my skull was officially inspected ...and nothing found that would have prevented my admission into the Holiest of Holies of the Communist Alliance." (circa 1850).20 Phrenology was the extent of Marx's anthropological science.
Incidentally, Wilhelm Liebknecht, who became the leader of the International Socialist Movement, made the anthropological observation that "the German empire could not have been founded by a nation of Dahomey Negroes."21 He reflected the violent anti-Negro views of his master Marx.
The preoccupation of the early socialists with the anthropological question was motivated mainly by their interest in the Negro question. It has remained so to the present day, but the ostensible point of view is now completely reversed, to conform to the present communist world-strategy.
The socialist-communist preoccupation with the Negro question was never due to any humanitarian motives. They were mainly concerned with the strategic importance of Africa and other parts of the world which had a sizeable Negro segment. The use of the Negro for political purposes fitted into the socialist project of an ultimate world socialist government. Actually the interest of Marx and the host of socialists who followed him, has been predicated mainly on their image of the Negro as a potentially submissive and slavish tool for a socialist order. They believed then, and still believe that the Negroes possess qualities which lend themselves to a socialist order, where a docile and controllable element is required. There remained also the strategic value of the Negro as a means of agitating and disrupting society through campaigns for extreme social demands under the label of anti-discrimination. Karl Marx was very bitter in his denunciations of Abraham Lincoln for his policy of compromise and the easing of batreds.22 However, in a classical example of socialist hypocrisy, when Marx. realized that the Southern forces were irrevocably defeated, he wrote to Lincoln: "They" (the workingmen of Europe) "consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single minded son of the working class, to lead the country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world."23
Lincoln believed in 'separate but equal'
The early trends of modem anthropology resembled Abraham Lincoln's position in the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Lincoln said:
"I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position."
Lincoln summed up the anthropological conclusions of the day when he said that the Negro "is not my equal in many respects:-- certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment." Lincoln held that the Negro is "entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence---the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.24 He expected this to be realized within the framework of social segregation of whites and Negroes.
Anthropological opinion of the day was very much taken up with the question of the white and Negro races because the entire nation was sharply divided on the basic question of slavery. The differences between the Negro and white races were discussed exhaustively and in great detail. Even the most rabid abolitionists, including those of socialist belief, printed anthropological data showing the wide diversity of brain, skull, skeleton, muscles, nervous system and psychic response between the white and Negro races. Related studies marked the physical and psychological differences observable among the oriental peoples, American Indians, Eskimos, South Sea Negritos, and the Australian aborigines.
The point of view of most anti-slavery leaders in Northern United States before and during the Civil War was that the Negroes were a radically different branch of the human race, and that integration of the two races was not practical, nor possible. This iIJ why such strenuous efforts were made to colonize the Negroes in tropical climes far removed from the United States. Contrary to common belief, the movement against slavery was not a movement for integration. It was basically philanthropic and humanitarian in nature carried out by persons who, for the most part, did not believe the Negro to be as well constituted as the white man for complex civilized living.
In the midst of the Civil War, Lincoln probably summed up this anthropological attitude when he told a Negro audience:
"We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted it affords a reason at least why we should be separated."25
The socialist coterie reflected this same point of view in the first edition of the encyclopedia edited by Dana and Ripley. In several articles they present detailed information emphasizing mental and physical variances between the white and Negro races.26 It must be remembered that Karl Marx collaborated journalistically and scholastically with both these American socialists.27
Early socialists were segregationists
The socialistic Henry Adams observed in the 1890's:
"I am satisfied that Pearson is right, and that the dark races are gaining on us, as they have already done in Haiti, and are doing throughout the West Indies and our Southern States. In another fifty years, at the same rate of movement, the white races will have to re-conquer the tropics by war and nomadic invasion, or be shut up, north of the fortieth parallel."28
This was then the prevailing point of view among a large segment of the socialistic fellowship.
But at about the same period, anthropological research by such men as William Graham Sumner, in America, and Herbert Spencer, in England, spread the ideas of Social Darwinism. The theory of selectivity based upon the principle of the "survival of the fittest" supplied scientific justification for personal freedom and the free play of individual talent and creativity.
Sumner's book Folkways, which appeared at the turn of the century, demonstrated the tremendous impact of the infinite mass of traditions, habits and myths in influencing the course of human conduct and social organization. Sumner, however, continually emphasized that it was the unusual and creative people in society who altered and improved prevailing folkways and customs. Sumner used the designation of Folkways for the accumulation of a mass of custom and tradition Within society. The impact of Sumner's Folkways upon the Western intellect was tremendous.
Socialists were greatly disturbed by this development. Not only anthropology but other sciences began to build up evidence that a society built upon individual freedom, which allowed free play of creativity and enterprise, could bring about the greatest amount of progress for humanity. This principle struck at the very roots of the contrary socialist premise.
The socialists, finding that they could not destroy Sumner's popularity or his premises, proceeded to adopt his symbols and twist them in socialist directions. They found in the words of R. Hofstadter that "on the subject of laissez-faire and property rights, however, Sumner was uncompromising and absolute." Hofstadter echoes the socialist attitude during the beginning of the 20th century when he states: "The ideas for which Folkways is most esteemed were never reconciled with the rest of his thought." Tearing fragments of Sumner's Folkways out of the context and denigrating his conclusions, the leftists proceeded to use his data as a weapon for socialism. They distorted the Folkways data to "prove" that the environment consisting of the hundreds of traditions, folkways and mores of society determines automatically what kind of person the individual will be.29
Marxists recognize only one commandment, to socialize all of humanity under a socialistic regime. All other actions are rated according to their effect in accomplishing this aim. If facts and sciences appear to contradict the basic theme of socialism then the facts must be falsified and the sciences re-interpreted.
Anthropology added to social sciences
Modem American anthropology received its new direction and slant from a group of leftist sociologists before the turn of the century (circa 1890). It was during this period that anthropology was garnered into the big basket of "social sciences". The major influence came from Germany. Germany, at that time, was firmly in the grip of various brands of collectivism. The entire intellectual class was monopolized by socialistic theories which went under the various names of Bismarckian State Socialism, Christian Socialism, Marxian Socialism and Lassallian Socialism. These various schools of thought pushed all other considerations into the background. German intellectuals who upheld the dignity of the individual and personal freedom were a small and generally muted minority.
Unfortunately, the fashion of the day was to send young Americans to Germany to finish their education. The thinking of a whole generation of Americans was infected with the virus of German collectivism. This was true of Economics, History, Sociology, and Jurisprudence, as well as Anthropology.
Among the chief architects of American anthropology were Lester Ward and Albion Small, who worked as a team to found American sociology. They could not tolerate the data that physical anthropology was collecting which showed the diversity and complexity of the human family. Human diversity and variations of adaptability existing among different racial stocks struck a telling blow against the socialist philosophy which was predicated upon the premise that all people were uniformly plastic and should be molded into a common form.
Since a frontal attack upon these data seemed impractical, these early socialistic academicians decided to use diversionary tactics. Having been, in the main, educated in Germany, they borrowed a concept which was in great vogue with all the collectivistic German philosophies,-"Kultur".30
Actually, in 1844, four years before the Communist Manifesto was issued, Karl Marx had outlined the cultural environment concept as being the socialist key to human conduct. In propounding anthropological opinions, at the age of twenty-six, Marx laid the basis for a policy which has remained basically unchanged for over 120 years in the socialist-communist movement. He wrote:
"The primitives actually do not 'see' the same thing as the more developed races even though their biological structure may be the same. It is precisely because of the different character of their social environment that they see differently. What one is attentive to, the other overlooks; what is significant here is indifferent there. "31
Modem Supreme Court decisions relative to the question of Negro segregation sound like an echo of Marx's premise that men are merely plastic reflectors of the "social" i.e., "cultural" environment. Marx's collaborator Frederick Engels, seven years after the death of Marx, admitted that their emphasis on the economic structure of society as being the sole determining basis of all ideas was one-sided. He asked the socialist movement to fill in the gaps with a broader and more detailed series of environmental items in order to buttress up the then already inadequate theory of economic determinism.32
The cultural device was projected as a scientific facade to justify socialistic aims. Engels, at the same time, gave the direction to all subsequent leftist anthropologists who continuously called for "social control" by the manipulation of cultural influences and social structures.33
Communistic elements tried to exploit the revolt in Germany in 1848-49. Moor the suppression of that uprising, they continued to bore into German thinking by promoting a school of thought which they labelled "kulturgeschichte" (cultural history). This they designated as a new science. It taught that the German nation represented an advanced and cultural syndrome; further, that the nature of a people could be shifted into an entirely new direction merely by imposing radically different cultural teachings, i.e., a different ideology and social perspective.34
German "kultur" becomes
American "culture"
Bismarck in 1870 seized upon this ideal of "German culture" and used it as the rallying cry in his battle to set up a monarchical German state socialism, against the opposition of the Catholic Church. He declared a "Kulturkampf" (culture war) of the German government against the Roman Church.35
The German socialistic cultural method was imported into this country through the large numbers of American students who had been educated and trained in German universities after the Civil War. The socialist movement in the United States at that time was already under domination of large numbers of German immigrants who had fled to this country. The "kulturgeschichte" ideas were also nurtured by this element.
The kulturgeschichte school was supported here by a group of socialist professors, the most prominent of whom were Lester F. Ward, Albion W. Small, E. A. Ross and Franklin H. Giddings. These men were the founders of sociology and cultural anthropology as a university discipline in the United States.
Albion W. Small mentions that with the help of Rockefeller money, he and his cohorts established the first recognized Chair of Sociology in the United States. However, this department was designated at first as Social Science and Anthropology, and later as Sociology and Anthropology.36 It must be remembered that this was at the same time (1892) that Frederick Engels, the executor of Marx's policies, laid down the new line of cultural approach for anthropology and the other so-called "social sciences". The Marxist A. W. Small meshed his activities into this new 'line' of the Marxist movement. Twenty-four years later he wrote:
"I must confess that a look at the schedule of the latter department" (anthropology) "now brings blushes to my seasoned cheeks. It is ocular proof of the boldness of the bluff we were putting Up."37
This "bluff" was the formal launching of socialistically dominated anthropology in the United States. Unfortunately, this "bluff" remained largely undetected for over 60 years and its tragic impact is observable in the racial policies of the United States today.
Ross, in 1905, could boast that "I dare say the few thousand university trained Germans, and Americans educated in Heidelberg or Gottingen, have injected more German culture into our veins than all the immigrants that ever passed through Castle Garden."38
Leftist sociologists
pervert anthropology
Properly speaking, modern anthropology in the United States is an offshoot of the same leftist group that initiated sociology as a university discipline. Lester F. Ward, who is considered the Father of American Sociology, is also one of the founders of what is also passed off as anthropology.39 Specifically, modern anthropology is actually "social anthropology" or "cultural anthropology". The main reason why this particular slant has appropriated the generic name of anthropology is to facilitate by a well organized campaign of name calling and politically inspired charges, the suppression of factual anthropological information which contradicts the dogma of socialism.
The major text, cited in almost every university-course in sociology before 1900, was Lester F. Ward's Dynamic Sociology. This work was a massive compendium proving the inevitability of socialism. Written during the horse-and-buggy stage of American civilization, this work echoed Marx's premise that society was already overripe for socialism due to what they then thought was the high technical development of civilization. This claim was made before the age of the automobile, the airplane and radio-television. America carried on its daily business through the horse-drawn vehicles, and mud roads made much of the nation impassable during periods of rain and snow. Compared to today, the average person lived in circumstances much more akin to colonial America.
Lester Ward was touted as the creator of original thoughts on socialism, and the case was made out that he was led to this point of view by the overwhelming weight of evidence accumulated during his researches. Elaborate attempts have been made to show that he arrived at a socialistic point of view independent of Marx and the Marxist credo.40 This claim is wholly false,as was known by those making it.
Lester F. Ward, was the brother of C. Osborne Ward. In 1870, C. Osborne Ward wrote The Great Labor Party, a socialistic tract which had wide influence here. "C. Osborne Ward, who had read and met Marx, advocated social change through the organized power of the working Class."41
The Ward brothers had been in dose collaboration in both commercial and intellectual pursuits for many years previous to the publication of Dynamic Sociology in 1883. Thus, the hands of Karl Marx helped to fashion the very beginnings of American sociology and social anthropology. Lester F. Ward, to the day of his death, was associated with the American Socialist Society, and was a teacher at the socialist Rand School of Social Science.42
Albion Small, in concert with Lester F. Ward, acted as an expediter of socialistic ideas through the field of sociology and social anthropology. He was a "sympathetic student of Marx" and advanced his socialistic beliefs in the guise of Christian Socialism.43 He believed that all the sociological disciplines, including anthropology, should be merged into a "social science" and "must eventually be a single organized body of knowledge."44 Small was an early practitioner of the slick Fabian socialist type of operation. He wrote Lester F. Ward, urging him to tone down some of his socialistic views because certain people "would otherwise follow you very much further and would accept very much more of your instruction, than they will consent to take when they see in what direction it tends."45
Small looked upon the Christian Socialist Movement from a strictly opportunistic point of view. His sincerity was confined strictly to his socialist belief, and his manipulations of the Christian religion worked toward its ultimate destruction. This is a classic exposition of the manner in which Christian socialism has been manipulated and Christian beliefs eroded by socialist schemers.
Socialists sounded like Nazis
Curiously, the anthropological views of those leftists who laid the basis for American social anthropology would be considered nazi-like today. Lester Ward, while propounding Marxist-like socialism, held the view that in African Negroes "the nasal bones are completely ossified, so as to leave no trace of a suture; this fact is not found in ordinary men, but is the normal condition of monkeys and apes, even the young ones. The arms of Negroes, as demonstrated by exhaustive observations made by Gould, Broca, Pruner Bey, Lawrence and others, are relatively longer than those of Europeans. The difference is much greater in all the families of apes."46
He also stated:
"And although the lowest men do not-differ from the highest physically as widely as they do mentally, still the different races are sufficiently distinct to be classed as so many species.... "47
This view on the Negroes and other dark races was echoed by Ward's colleague, E. A. Ross. Ross had spanned the 19th and 20th century left-wing movements in America in the course of his lifetime. He reflected socialistic thought and associations which included the American Fabian Society, the Socialist Party, the American Socialist Society and the development of the communist movement with its myriad fronts. 48
In 1904, Ross subscribed to the idea that:
"The Negro is not simply a black Anglo-Saxon deficient in schooling, but a being who in strength of appetite, and in power to control them differs considerably from the white man."49
He also declared: "The superiority of a race cannot be preserved without pride of blood and an uncompromising attitude towards the lower races."50 [racism from where? the LEFT DC]
He opposed the interbreeding of races such as exists in Brazil, or in Portuguese East Africa, He wrote:
"In North America, on the other hand, the white men have rarely mingled their blood with that of the Indian or toned down their civilization to meet his capacities. The Spaniard absorbed the Indians, the English exterminated them by fair means or foul
"Whatever may be thought of the latter policy, the net result is that North America from the Bering Sea to the Rio Grande is dedicated to the highest type of civilization; while for centuries the rest of our hemisphere will drag the ball and chain of Hybridism.
"Since the higher culture should be kept pure, as well as the higher blood, that race is stronger which, down to the cultivator or the artisan, has a strong sense of its superiority.51
When the socialist-communist line changed on the question of racial tactics, Ross promptly changed his "scientific opinion" to conform. In 1929 he wrote:
"What makes Malays or American Indians, or Congolese a mystery to us is not mental quirk but cultural background and special experiences. Given our training, their minds would work as ours." 52
During the latter half of the 19th century, the double-standard of thought on anthropological matters established by Marx and Engels was followed assiduously by their American disciples. As noted previously, Engels had declared that the Aryan and Semitic races were superior. However, for political purposes, equalitarian slogans were issued. Karl Marx in 1867, wrote in Das Kapital:
"Labor cannot emancipate itself in the white skin when in the black it is branded. "53
As brought out previously, during the same period, his personal correspondence with Engels was full of derogatory and insulting references to "niggers" and "nigger-like" qualities.
Privately anti-Negro
while publicly pro-Negro
When one bears in mind that the consuming passion of the socialist-communist forces is the establishment of a political power whereby the entire human race is collectivized, then one can understand the various shifts in tactics as time goes on. Even though sociologists who were laying the foundation for social anthropology believed that Aryans were innately superior to Negroes and other dark races, nevertheless they set about fashioning an anthropological ideology which was in direct contradiction to their own personal beliefs. They felt that the cultural approach, according to which populations can be fashioned at will was a more useful device. Socialists ruthlessly sacrifice all facts and personal beliefs to their sacred cause. In their hands, science becomes a tool for the manipulation of society, in which truth and real scientific progress have no part.
The group of left-wing sociologists which included Ward, Small, Giddings, Ross and Thorstein Veblen, laid the basis for seducing anthropology into a leftist path via the cultural approach. All of the functions of social and political living were reduced to cultural categories. They created the fashion whereby academicians and writers on social topics began to use the terms "culture of politics," "culture of religion," "culture of economic attitudes," ad infinitum. The term culture was thus expanded by degrees to fit the meaning of the German "Kultur" which was much broader than the usual English meaning of the word.54
However, a catalyst was needed by socialists to amalgamate anthropology with the new cultural combination. The scheme was carried out by importation of the "Kultur" device from Germany itself.
A geographer poses as anthropologist
Franz Boas, born in Minden, Germany, in 1858, eventually became known as the founder of the American School of Anthropology. His parents were both radical socialists, and were supporters of the communistic rebels during the German Revolution of 1848. His mother was a life-long worker in the cause of socialism. One of Boas' aunts married Dr. Abraham Jacobi, a member of the Communist League headed by Karl Marx. Jacobi was later sentenced to prison for armed revolutionary violence in Cologne. ISS Jacobi, who was a physician, later emigrated to the United States, and was widely active in promoting Marxist socialism.56
Jacobi originally entered America as a Marxist agent. Karl Marx had prepared for his reception by a series of letters to Joseph Wedemeyer, Marx's chief representative in the United States.57 Jacobi was used by Marx to screen arriving German refugees as to their loyalty to socialism and their ability as agitators.58 Thus, Boas had ready-made personal contacts in America to aid him in carrying out the family socialistic tradition.
While still in Germany, in 1883, Boas was sent by the "German newspaper, The Berliner Tageblatt, to study anthropological material in Baffin Land in the Northern Canadian Arctic region."59 At that time, he did not possess either training or a degree in anthropology. He possessed university degrees in physical and cultural geography. His doctoral dissertation was in physics and the title of his paper was Contributions to the Understanding to the Color of Water. Another thesis of his was That Contemporary Operetta was Equally to be Condemned on Grounds of Art and Morality.
Boas' trip to Baffin Land was made as a geographer. While in Baffin Land, Boas began to apply the Kultur approach of the German collectivist thought in analyzing the native populations of the Baffin region. This theme that the cultural environment determines the man, and not that the man shapes the environment, became the primary theme of the Boas socialistic school throughout his long lifetime.
https://www.baffinland.com/about-us/who-we-are/
In 1886, he was a Docent of Geography at the University of Berlin. He arrived in New York in 1887, and by 1888 was already installed as a Docent of Anthropology at Clarke University, where he proceeded to issue the first Ph.D. in Anthropology in the United States.60 How Boas originally became endowed with the title of anthropologist has never been satisfactorily explained from a formally academic point of view.
Boas loyally reflected the point of view of the German socialist movement during most of his life. Towards the end, he became very closely attached to the American Communist movement.61
Beginning his career at Columbia University in 1899, Boas joined forces with the socialist sociologist Franklin H. Giddings, who had variously been termed sociologist, anthropologist, and political scientist. Boas and the socialistic cadres proceeded to use their leftist faction at Columbia as a political vehicle.
During that general period, Columbia University had a well established nest of socialists and socialistic partisans among the faculty. They worked together as a close and well-knit group. Included in this group were Charles A. Beard and James Harvey Robinson, historians, E.R.A Seligman, economist, and John Dewey.62 Dewey was touted as an educational philosopher. He developed the collectivistic system of education which was dubbed "progressive education". Socialist indoctrination under this label has infected American school systems for almost two generations.63
Leftists cluster at Columbia
Boas, with decades of socialist experience behind him, having learned the socialist credo at his mother's knee, used all the accumulated skill garnered from the German socialist movement to manipulate anthropology away from its physical aspects into the cultural environment theory. His socialistic cohorts at Columbia and other universities throughout the nation then extended this cultural socialistic concept into other disciplines, such as history, economics, sociology, political science, philosophy, and almost every other department having to do with social studies.
The Boas project was buttressed by reference books written by the Beard School in history, the Ross School in sociology, The Seligman school in economics, the Morris Cohen school in jurisprudence, and the John Dewey group in the philosophy of education.
The socialist coterie, operating with the prestige and respectability of their academic titles, began to promote one another's works through book reviews, educational manuals and required reading lists. All this has been continued to the present day, under the banner of individual thought and intellectual freedom. This basic dishonesty has been responsible for the tremendous success of the socialistic permeation of our social life. The Boas fellowship were past masters in this technique. Today there are hopeful signs of rebellion against this deception by a growing number of scientists and educators.
In anthropology, as in the other social sciences, the impression has deliberately been created by its manipulators that collectivistic lor socialistic conclusions have been arrived at due to an overwhelming mass of scientific evidence pointing toward the inevitable triumph of socialism. The fact is that in almost every case, the personalities involved were socialists first, and applied themselves to various academic and scientific fields merely to use these as transmission belts for socialist purposes.
The Boas group was not satisfied with merely infecting the academic world with the environmental theory dressed up in cultural garb. They proceeded to enter into direct radical activity outside the educational field.
NAACP formed as a socialist front
In 1909 a group of socialists and socialist sympathizers founded a socialist Negro front organization which they labelled the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The two prime movers of the organization, Mary White Ovington and William English Walling were prominent white socialists.64 These two were also key members of the Fabian socialist organization in the United States which went under the name of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society (later called the League for Industrial Democracy).65
The NAACP was strictly a Socialist Party front of white radicals designed to push through measures based on demands for Negro rights which would aid in conditioning the United States for a socialistic society. 66
A few years previously, a parallel organization was organized of Negroes headed by W. E. B. Du Bois, a Harvard educated Negro socialist. This movement was termed the Niagara Movement, named after the locale of its organization at Niagara Falls, Canada.
The function of Du Bois and his group was to destroy the effectiveness of the great Negro leader Booker T. Washington. Washington had espoused the philosophy of Negro self-help and self-development in the trades and professions as a means of lifting Negroes into a higher economic and cultural level. The socialist controlled Niagara movement was quite successful in torpedoing the Booker T. Washington program.67 It was obvious that any successful self-development movement among Negroes would strengthen the present private enterprise system rather than weaken it. The socialist premise has always been to weaken the social order so as to render it easier for the final take-over. This is a fundamental long-range principle of over-all socialistic strategy. Later when the communists split off from the socialist movement they pursued this objective with added vigor.
By 1910, the socialists decided to merge the remnants of the Niagara movement into the NAACP. Thus was launched the full fledged organization of the NAACP as a socialist front among the Negroes.
Contrary to common opinion held by both laymen and experts alike, the notion of radical fronts was not invented by Bolshevik communists. The communists merely carried over an old Marxist device. The socialist movement had utilized deceptive fronts for at least 70 years previous to the launching of the NAACP.
Radical fronts an old tactic
Karl Marx's disciple Engels, wrote in 1885:
"As early as February 7, 1840, the legally functioning German Workers' Educational Association, which still exists was founded. The Association served the League as a recruiting ground for new members, and since, as always, the communists were the most active and intelligent members of the Association, it was a matter of course that its leadership lay entirely in the hands of the League. The League soon had several communities, or, as they were then still called 'lodges', in London. The same obvious tactics were followed in Switzerland and els&- where. Where workers' associations could be founded, they were utilized in like manner. Where this was forbidden by law, one joined choral societies, athletic clubs,and the like. Connections were to a large extent maintained by members who were continually travelling back and forth; they also, when required, served as emissaries."68
The NAACP, the American Civil Liberties Union, and scores of other socialist front groups, were launched precisely in the same manner that the 19th century Marxist socialist fronts were created, beginning as early as 8 years before the publication of the 1848 Communist Manifesto.
The NAACP was consistently embarrassed by the fact of the extreme scarcity of Negro membership. Finally, W. E. B. Du Bois was ensconced in the national office of the NAACP as an editor of its magazine The Crisis. He was proudly displayed as a literary Negro conversation piece by the white socialist leaders of the NAACP. Franz Boas was enlisted by the socialists to furnish the anthropological justification for NAACP activity among the Negroes. He worked out a very revealing program which laid the basis for anthropology not only in the NAACP, but also in anthropological teaching throughout the United States. In order to pave the way for the cultural environment theory as the dominant molder of mankind, he had to explain away many salient facts of physical anthropology. He admitted that:
"The anthropologist recognizes that the Negro and the white represent the two most divergent types of mankind."
He also stated:
"It is true that the average size of the Negro brain is slightly smaller than the average size of the brain of the white race."
Socialists planned racial mixture
Over 50 years ago Boas concluded that the real solution of the Negro problem in this country would be full racial mixture and a final blending of the population.69
In 1963, a President of the United States took the identical position. 70
Boas busied himself with giving a professorial tone to the NAACP movement. The nation began to be bombarded by a barrage of so-called scientific opinion on the racial question. The major theme projected was that there are no fundamental differences among races. This particularly was applied to the Negro and white races. There was constant repetition that all mankind was cast from the same mold. Only some mysterious compound called the culture complex was said to create differences. For example, Boas would team up with Mary White Ovington in a book which emphasized that the only major differences between the white and Negro races are those of cultural environment. A whole bevy of transitory socialist fronts were created. One example was the Greenwich House Committee on social investigation (circa 1911). This committee sponsored the book written by Mary White Ovington of the NAACP with a foreword by Franz Boas.71
The Greenwich House Committee numbered among its directors such socialists names as E. R. A. Seligman, chairman, Franz Boas, Franklin H. Giddings and Mary White Ovington. The tentacles of this fellowship reached from the Socialist Party and the League for Industrial Democracy (Fabian) into the NAACP and the National Urban League. Thus, a small well-knit group, largely unopposed and undetected, managed WIder the cover of scientific auspices to spread its socialistic ideas and tactics throughout the entire nation.
In the course of a few decades the well-organized Boas leftist anthropological phalanx had managed to cripple physical anthropology as a scientific discipline. This was done by degrees. The early works of Boas began with a mixture of the cultural approach with anthropometric and biological data about the different races. Little by little, the physical aspects of anthropology were pushed into the background through ridicule and politically inspired charges. By the time Hitler rose to power, the socialists throughout the world, and the Boas group particularly, began to apply epithets of "racism" and "genocide" to those who endeavored to carry on scientific studies of the various races and sub-races of humankind. They were helped greatly by Hitler's use of the racial theme to excuse his inhumanities.
The Nazi preoccupation with the theory of Aryan "superiority" to justify their massacres of millions of innocent civilians was cited in literature, speeches, university lectures and newspapers, as the reason for damning all physical investigations into racial differences. By almost imperceptible degrees the Boas leftist school, which was made up of both socialist and communist partisans, began to create the impression that the Aryan "superiority" theory was a Fascistic abomination and invention.
Communist sources rejoiced that "Boas' teachings on race have thus provided a powerful ideological instrument" and that his group "offered scientific evidence to refute Nazi racialism and the cults of 'Nordicism' and 'Aryanism' ".72
Socialists pioneered "Aryan superiority"
Socialists and communists pretend that the concept of Aryan "superiority" springs strictly from Nazi and Fascist sources. Socialists would have the world forget that for several decades in the 19th century they themselves toyed with the idea of using the theory of Aryan "superiority"as a means of selling socialism to the public. We have noted previously that Karl Marx's colleague Friedrich Engels spoke of "the superior development of Aryans"73
Actually, the term "Aryan" as related to a racial stock is completely misplaced and has been known to be so for over 100 years. "Aryan" can only be applied philologically,-to a relationship of languages and not of race. In 1858 it was estimated that 45 nations covering several continents were connected by language similarities which could be termed Aryan.74
In the 19th century, it was well known that the term "Arya" or "Aryan" originally described a group of people who occupied Western and South-Western Asia in remote antiquity. Their descendants today can be found in the Himalayas, Eastern India and Iran. The false and unscientific designation as "Aryan" of peoples speaking Germanic languages has helped to inflict the horrors of concentration camps and gas chambers on millions of people.
Actually, socialists were among the pioneers in spreading the ideas of the superiority of "Aryans" as a racial category. Historically they must take the major blame for preparing the German mind for the Hitlerian atrocities. They steadily advocated Aryan "superiority" in Germany. We have noted before the discrepancy between Marx's public views on anthropological matters and his personal and private bias, not only against the Negro, but against other races as well. Spiro, in an exhaustive work on the subject, writes:
"The name of Utin serves to bring up the national scale in Marx's and Engels' private ideology. With them, of course, the Germans stood above all nations and races. Next came the Turks, French, British, Italians, Magyars and others. Near the bottom of the scale they placed the Russians, still lower, the Southern Slavs, and beneath all the Jews. However, a Jew who worked closely with them was cleared of the 'stigma' and won for himself the title of the nationality of the country in which he was brought Up."75
Other socialists, however, were not so circumspect in separating their private from their public views. There is voluminous evidence of extensive "Aryan Superiority" writings and speeches by socialists of the 19th, as well as the beginning of the 20th century. We will list a few which were the most dramatic and were translated into the major languages of Europe.
Albert Regnard, famous French socialist, who had been Secretary General of the Paris Police under the bloody Paris Commune of 1871, was an active promoter of "Aryan superiority" as a means of building socialism. In a propaganda piece he claimed "to prove scientifically the superiority of the Aryans, the only race that is able to prepare 'social renovation'''. 76 Regnard laid the basis for Hitler's concept by insisting that the Aryan race "is the only race to possess the notions of justice, liberty and beauty. All real Science is of Aryan origin. Scientific Socialism is a 'Franco-Germanic creation, i.e., Aryan in the strongest meaning of the term".77 Regnard also categorized the "Jewish race" as "deplorably inferior". [hmm,that word sounds familiar DC]
In 1888, Gustav Rouanet, another leading socialist, also publicly brought in the question of Aryan superiority and expressed the belief "that the Aryans are culturally superior to the Semites." Like Hitler, Rouanet identified the struggle between capitalists and workers as being basically one "between Aryans and Semites".78
The "Aryan superiority" theme raised its head again in the socialist movement in 1898 when Edmund Picard, a prominent Belgian socialist and socialist member of the Belgian Senate, wrote a socialist book entitled L'Aryano-Semitisme. In this book he tried "to synthesize both anti-Semitism and socialism". He wrote "that the antagonism between the Semitic race and the Aryan race is as old as the co-existence of the two races." Picard stated that, ."the Semite in general, and the Jew in particular, is a parasite", and that "preference in everything must be given to Aryans". He took the position that "socialism seeks to abolish social injustice with respect to all workers, Aryans, Jews, Negroes and Mongols. Scientific and humanitarian anti-Semitism is by no means opposed to this final aim of socialism, but the fraternity of the oppressed does not imply an identical status for various races within one and the same civilization, nor the admission of one race to the direction of the affairs of another, nor assimilation of different races."79
The "Aryan" theme ran through the socialist movement for many years. For example, in 1933, Shaw's advice to solve the Jewish problem in Germany was "force the Jews to wed Aryans".80
Leftists laid groundwork for Hitler
Much has been said and written of the Nazi use of the Aryan theory to perpetrate the crimes of genocide against innocent millions. However, the fact must be noted that if the European socialists had not for several preceding generations intentionally twisted and distorted the scientific study of anthropology, and had not themselves spread the concept of "Aryan superiority", it is doubtful that Hitler and his minions could have received such mass support for the savage treatment of various racial and ethnic groups.
The socialist-communist syndrome today has extended and intensified distortions in the racial field. This is particularly true of information flowing out of many American academic sources. Men of good will can only hope that the result will not be to furnish grist for the mill in some future acts of racially inspired savagery.
In the United States, also, after the Civil War, the socialists espoused Aryan "superiority" through the Populist movement and in the universities. At the tum of the century the socialist sociologist E. A. Ross ascribed to the Germanic or Aryan element the inherent characteristics of "noble virtues", and "ambition", and credited them with being "more enterprising" and possessing greater "honor and self-respect" than "the more outward-looking sensuous peoples of the South."81
German immigrants, during the same period, reflected a strong tradition of Aryan superiority. The socialist movement was primarily Germanic in content at that time.
Victor Berger led the German elements in the Socialist Party of America, and strongly reflected the Aryan credo. Berger, who was elected to Congress on the Socialist ticket in 1911, catered to the prevailing Northern attitude on the Negro by describing him as "inferior". He also reflected the socialists' attitude in the United States relative to "inferior races", including the Negro. He wrote:
"There can be no doubt that the negroes and mulattoes constitute a lower race-that the Caucasian and indeed even the Mongolian have the start on them in civilization by many thousand years----so that negroes will "find it difficult to ever overtake them. The many cases of rape which occur wherever negroes are settled in large numbers prove, moreover, that the free contact with the whites has led to the further degeneration of the negroes, as well as all other inferior races."82
U.S. radicals advocated
socialist segregation
A booklet written by John M. Work, national secretary of the Socialist Party of America, published in 1905, asked the question: "What are we socialists going to do with the Negro?" He gave an equivocal answer by stating:
" . . . Socialism will release you from having to associate with black people if they are disagreeable to you. It will also release the negroes from having to associate with white people."
☭☭☭
"Under present conditions the negroes and whites are compelled to live in the same localities because the negroes work for the whites.
"Under socialism, it will be entirely feasible for the negroes to live in localities by themselves, if they so desire, and run the public industries of those localities. Since the negroes as a rule do not like to associate with the whites, but prefer the company of their own people, it is probable that when socialism makes their voluntary segregation possible, they will take advantage of it...."
☭☭☭
"Undoubtedly when the whites no longer need the negroes about them for economic reasons, many of the whites will also
be in favor of the segregation of the races, ..... "83 The promise of socialist segregation of the races was an application of socialist tactics to prevailing conditions. It catered to the then prevailing'views on the racial question among the white population in the North.
During the same period, the Boas group was busily creating an entirely new approach to the question of race relations. Their master strategy called for gradually persuading the American population to accept complete social and economic integration, including the intermarriage of the Negro and white races, This was a long range project. It crept forward under the cover of "science." This was one of the most successful socialistic maneuvers of our time, leading directly to the present racial turmoil,
The socialist-communist propagandists on the race question have attributed most of the "Aryan superiority" thinking of the Nazis to two 19th century writers. They were J. A. Gobineau (1816- 1882) and Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855-1927) who wrote works relating to "Aryan superiority" during the 19th century.84
The leftists generally avoid mentioning that the socialist movement was thoroughly saturated with the "Aryan superiority" concept
during the same period. They select two non-socialists in order to
carry out the fiction that the "Aryan superiority" idea is strictly an
upper class manifestation. Their cry today is that Nazi racism is
a capitalistic weapon used against the forces of socialism. Such
distortions and falsehoods of commission and omission saturate the
books and papers of leftist academicians, especially those in the so called "social sciences".
By the early 1930's, Boas had built up a large group of cultural
anthropologists, who had been his students. This leftist phalanx
came to be known as the Boas School of anthropology, and included
among others Margaret Mead, Ruth Benedict, Gene Weltfish, Clyde
Kluckhohn and M. F. Ashley-Montagu. His graduate students had
spread allover and established themselves in key teaching positions
in universities and colleges throughout the country.
Books on anthropology that did not reflect the Boas view as
college texts became a rarity. Views predicated on the scientific facts
of physical anthropology were vilified and ridiculed into obscurity.
By 1934, the International socialist and communist movement
reached an agreement to operate on a united front basis. The new
radical unity was advanced under the title of "The People's Front".
Stalin saw in Hitler a worldwide competitor operating in the socialistic field. Previously Stalin had considered the socialist movement
as the major competitor in the radical field.85 Before the "People's
Front" arrangement, communists were instructed to brand socialists
throughout the world as "social fascists". 86
In its broad aspects the struggle took on the characteristics of
a group of gangsters, all out after the same loot. Like gangsters,
different contending radicalisms are willing to annihilate one another
but, at the same time, always present a united front against a common enemy (actually a common victim). In the case of gangsters, it
is the constituted police authority which is the common enemy; in
the case of the radicals it is the "capitalist class" or "capitalist government".
The leftist-led cultural anthropologists adapted themselves to
the new socialist-communist united front. The United States and
other Western nations were in the throes of an economic depression.
Socialist and communist theoreticians interpreted the economic
crisis as the last phase of the system of private ownership. They
fully expected the socialist revolution to sweep the earth at that time.
Followers of the Boas anthropological school, which had always
been made up of both communist and socialist elements, threw
off their cloak of caution and came out openly for a socialistic order.87
Anthropology a part of leftist arsenal
V. F. Calverton, a radical who straddled the socialist and communist camps, declared: "Anthropology for anthropology's sake is
all even more absurd than art for art)s sake." He insisted that in anthropology "the radical should take the lead".88 The leftists
always label all science that contradicts their purposes as a
"capitalist science". Calverton adopted the classic leftist pattern.
He branded physical anthropology a "middle class" anthropology.
Calverton charged it with being a prop for "nationalism", "imperialism", "private property" and the "monogamous family."89 According
to Calverton and his cohorts, physical anthropology "was thus made
to serve as an excellent prop for middle class ethics." Scientifically
speaking, this was the greatest nonsense, but as propaganda it was
very effective. Ironically enough most radical anthropologists have
a middle-class background.
Feeling that the depression then ravaging the country was about
to result in socialism, Calverton and his colleagues felt that the
time had arrived to drop the carefully built up camouflage. He
openly declared anthropology a weapon to be used. He admitted
that radicals used certain anthropological data: "because they fitted
in so well with their own doctrine of social evolution, with the triadic
theory of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, and lent themselves so
excellently to the Marxian interpretation of culture as an economic
unit. They supplied a historic illustration of the Marxian dialectic.
They gave new historic meaning to the cause of the proletariat.90
The Making of Man was an anthology and not the work of one
man alone. It was accepted as a basic text by all the major socialist-communist groups. Its contributors like Boas were mostly leftists
with the exception of a few whose selections were taken out of context and used to buttress leftist premises.91
Franz Boas, Ruth Benedict and the communist Bernhard J.
Stern all participated in putting this anthology together. It served
as a basic text, not only for the radical movement, but also in colleges
and universities throughout the United States. The Making of Man
is still being sold today in large quantities through Random House's
subsidiary, Modem Library,
Calverton's The Making of Man was such a popular success
that left-wing anthropologists were encouraged to spread their
anthropological propaganda further among the general population.
Leftists plotted to indoctrinate the nation
Conferences were held between Franz Boas, Margaret Mead,
Otto Klineberg, and a number of others of leftist persuasion, on the
creation of a popular work which would use anthropological material
as a means of putting forward a socialistic theme.92 Although Ruth
Benedict ostensibly was to be the author of this work, the others
mentioned had a direct part in its composition. The private correspondence of Ruth Benedict, Margaret Mead, Reo Fortune and others
indicates this definitely.93 Commencing in 1932, Ruth Benedict
began to assemble into manuscript form what was actually joint
work by a group of leftists. As usual among left-wing "social science"
theories the conclusion was already foreordained and the facts preselected in order to justify socialistic preconceptions.
In her private correspondence,
Margaret Mead frankly
indicated that the forthcoming book by Ruth Benedict was deliberately framed to put over certain social and political views. Margaret
Mead wrote to Ruth Benedict, after looking over the rough manuscript:
"Of course I am not sure whether you are writing an essay
in social theory, or an essay in the philosophy of cultural
temperament, or a book which, under the guise of dealing with
this point is to put over a lot of other points also."94
Margaret Mead then added:
"I am afraid that it is the latter...."95
Today, many years later, Margaret Mead, in her preface to
Ruth Benedict's Patterns of Culture, fails to indicate the leftist
bias of the book. This is typical of leftist deviousness.
Patterns of Culture was two years in the making by Ruth Benedict, with the help of a score or more of anthropologists and other
so-called "social scientists"96 In college courses on the so-called
"social sciences" Patterns of Culture is generally a required study.
Propaganda peddled as "science"
As previously mentioned, this work has been a bestseller, and
paperback editions alone have sold over a million copies. Patterns of
Culture has influenced lawmaking and judicial decisions all the way
up to the United States Supreme Court: This book is one of the
most diabolically clever and smooth pieces of propaganda indoctrination. It inculcates socialist doctrines under the guise of anthropological science.
Of. all the thousands of primitive cultures, past and present,
throughout the world, Ruth Benedict and her cohorts picked three
to represent the 'good guys' and 'bad guys' in our present society.
In other words, they had to find prototypes to represent the 'bad
guys', i.e., leaders of industry and business, and the 'good guys', i.e.,
those who advocate a socialist state. It is amazing that the
academic and literary world has swallowed the bait so eagerly.
In a personal letter Margaret Mead gave Ruth Benedict the
following lead:
"So it would run a brief introduction-All straight theme
with no history and no sidelines or morals about race equality
or culture consciousness--Then the three cultures-then the
theoretical point-in relation to psychiatry, diffusion, etc."97
Ruth Benedict faithfully followed the outline presented to her.
She took three different tribes widely separated by distance and
history and used them as prototypes with which modern society was
compared. One tribe was the Dobu, located in the D'Entrecasteaux
Islands at the eastern tip of New Guinea. The Dobuans face life
on a rocky volcanic surface which is barren and incapable of supporting human life on any reasonable scale. The Dobuans belong
to the Australoid branch of the human family. The Australoids
are a racial group who "have narrow, gabled, ill-filled brain cases,
small brains relative to body size, and rather long limbs."98 Their
scale of civilization is very low and their inherited lack of mental
capacity, plus a most inhospitable environment, has resulted in a
culture reflecting many of the features of bestiality and viciousness.
These people have been singularly unfortunate in their basic inheritance. A large element of inbreeding has also probably contributed to congenital abnormalities on a large scale. The result is a culture
based upon mistrust, primitive antagonisms and an animal-like
ferocity.
Ruth Benedict ignored the fact that inherited characteristics
and a small brain case had handicapped these people and set a limit
on: their development. She chose only the external "cultural"
manifestations.
Like all leftists, she started. from the supposition that all sections of the human family have equal capabilities and potentials.
Naturally, she failed. to inform her readers of wide differences in the
physical and mental potential between the white Caucasians in the
United. States and the Australoid sub-race of Papuans to which the
Dobuans belong.
After a considerable playing around with exotic forms of superstitious ritual embroidered by reference to sexual techniques, Ruth
Benedict :finally came to the crux of her theme. She wrote:
"The Dobuan, therefore, is dour, prudish, and passionate,
consumed with jealousy and suspicion and resentment. Every
moment of prosperity he conceives himself to have wrung from
a malicious world by a conflict in which he has worsted his
opponent."99
Primitive sub-race likened to Puritans
She managed in the same breath to compare the savage Dobuan,
with his limited brain equipment, to the Puritans in America during
the 18th century.100 This is in keeping with the constantly recurring
theme of communists and socialists that Puritans are a vicious
symbol of early capitalism.101
Leftist historians are not in the least deterred by the anomaly
that Puritanism arose (1567) at least 250 years before the rise of what radicals call American capitalism. The great objections that
all collectivists have to the Puritans are that they were supposedly
imbued with a desire for "success" and "profit".
The fact that the Puritans burned a number of women as
witches in Salem, Massachusetts in 1692, has been used by the
entire leftist movement as a symbol of wicked capitalist cruelty.,102
Thus any attempt to restrict or impede the activities of radicals
is generally called a "witch hunt".
Ruth Benedict presented the Dobuan as a selfish, scheming and
highly individualistic savage. She neglected to point out that this
type of degeneration kept the Dobuan in a permanent state of
savagery for thousands of years. Our own entrepreneurial society on
the other hand has brought about more progress in the last hundred
years than had occurred in all of previous history combined Nevertheless, Ruth Benedict found many resemblances between the
savage Dobuan and modern entrepreneurs and executives. She wrote:
103 "In our own generation extreme forms of ego gratification are culturally supported in a similar fashion. Arrogant and unbridled egoists as family men, as officers of the law and in business, have been again and again portrayed by novelists and dramatists, and they are familiar in every community. Like the behavior of Puritan divines, their courses of action are often more social than those of the inmates of penitentiaries. In terms of the suffering and frustration that they spread about them there is probably no comparison. There is very possibly at least as great a degree of mental warping. Yet they are entrusted with positions of great influence and importance and are as a rule fathers of families. Their impress both upon their own children and upon the structure of our society is indelible. They are not described in our manuals of psychiatry because they are supported by every tenet of our civilization."
She complained that due to cultural restrictions "it is not yet
possible to discuss capitalism... " in an "objective" manner.104
Private enterprise called "paranoid trend"
Another tribe that Ruth Benedict chose was one which is
called the Kwakiutl, who are a small segment of the Northwest
Indian culture which has extended from Puget Sound to the seacoast of Alaska. The Kwakiutl are located in Vancouver Island, and
are noted for their addiction to speculation, gambling and the
ostentatious display of worldly possessions. Ruth Benedict picked
upon the pathological gambling of this one aberrant tribe as typical
of our Wall Street type of operation.
At the end of her chapter on the Kwakiutl she declares:
"The megalomaniac paranoid trend is a definite danger in our
society."105
"The chief motive that the institutions of the Kwakiutl rely
upon in which they share in great measure with modern society
is the motive of rivalry. Rivalry is a struggle that is not centered upon the real objects of the activity but upon outdoing a
competitor."
* * *
"Rivalry is notoriously wasteful. It ranks low in the scale
of human values. It is a tyranny from which, once it is encouraged in any culture, no man may free himself. The wish for
superiority is gargantuan; it can never be satisfied. The contest
goes 0'Il forever. The more goods the community accumulates,
the greater the counters with which men play, 'but the game is
as far from being won as it was when the stakes were small."
* * *
"The social waste is obvious. It is just as obvious in the
obsessive rivalry of Middletown where houses are built and
clothing bought and entertainments attended that each family
may prove that it has not been left out of the game.
"It is an unattractive picture. In Kwakiutl life the rivalry is
carried out in such a way that all success must be built upon
the ruin of rivals; in Middletown in such a way that individual
choices and direct satisfactions are reduced to a minimum and
conformity is sought beyond all other human gratifications. In
both cases it is clear that wealth is not sought and valued for
its direct satisfaction of human needs but as a series of counters
in the game of rivalry. If the will to victory were eliminated
from the economic, life as it is in Zuni,distribution and
consumption of wealth would follow quite different 'laws'."106
The third primitive group analyzed were the Zuni, a small offshoot of the Pueblo Indian group. The Zuni who are a remnant of
a civilization which has been declining for the last 400 years, have a
culture which depends upon collectivist practices and frowns upon
individual effort. Ruth Benedict went into great detail and devoted
much praise to the Zuni culture because of its collectivist and communal emphasis. Whereas the Dobu and the Kwakiutl were put
forward as evil symbols representing private enterprise, the Zuni
culture was pictured as a superior social order operating as a socialistic unit.107
There is nothing in Benedict's analysis to indicate that actually
the communal traditions of the Zuni were based upon a history
which required a permanent military organization. The Zuni were
continually harassed for generations by tribal enemies. The threat
was so long lasting that many of the features of military regimentation became frozen into their system of life. What Ruth Benedict
and her socialistic cohorts look upon as a desirable collectivism is
nothing but the unfortunate effect of a permanent state of siege.
Ruth Benedict dubbed the Kwakiutl culture Dionysian and the
collectivism of the Zuni Apollonian. These terms she borrowed
from the German philosopher Nietzsche. This gave her book the
illusion of loftiness. Actually, the Nietzschean thesis in philosophy
has been borrowed by all the socialists including the Nazi camp.108
The actual theme of Patterns of Culture is basically simple. It
is only the fancy embroidery of primitive curiosa which confuses the
reader.
Abnormal savages compared to executives
Ruth Benedict, and her socialistic and communistic fellow workers used anthropology as imposing camouflage to dignify their
puerile reliance on a few extreme and abnormal little groups of no
importance to vilify by an absurd comparison civilized individuals
who are striving to succeed in business and industry as "arrogant
egotists" who are ''mentally warped". The operations of the modem marketplace and the entire financial structure of credit and banking
are linked with the perverted culture of a small primitive Indian
group whose crude gambling instincts have developed a pathological
display of wasteful ostentation. It is the old socialist bromide of
picturing the free enterprise system as selfish and the socialist
utopian scheme as altruistic and virtuous. All this they cover with
a layer of pseudo-scientific verbiage.
Five years before she wrote Patterns of Culture, Ruth Benedict
expressed the following leftist evaluation of modem society:
"Our own civilization carries its burden of warfare, of the
dissatisfaction and frustration of wage earners, of the overdevelopment of acquisitiveness 109
This was a pure unadulterated Marxist enunciation of the
thesis of the class struggle. At the same time, Ruth Benedict indicated her hope of using anthropology as a means of insidiously
promoting socialistic processes when she declared:
"We hope, a little, that whereas change has hitherto been
blind, at the mercy of unconscious patternings, it will be possible
gradually, insofar as we become genuinely culture-conscious,
that it shall be guided by intelligence.110
The "intelligence" mentioned above, of course, is limited. solely
to that of Ruth Benedict and her socialistic and communistic coterie.
Such tricky propaganda put forward in the name of science is
as dishonest as Khrushchev, and has proved diabolically effective.
There have been attempts to whitewash Ruth Benedict's background in an effort to build up an illusion of her scientific impartiality. However, her leftist bias is obvious. She got her start in
anthropology from Alexander Goldenweiser, who was lecturing at
the socialistic New School for Social Research. 111 Goldenweiser was
an anthropological colleague of Franz Boas whose socialism dated
from his school days in Russia in 1902. For many years he was associated with the American Socialist Society and taught at the radical
Rand School of Social Science from 1915 on.' 112 Goldenweiser handed
over Ruth Benedict and other fledgling anthropologists to Boas at
Columbia University. Margaret Mead writes:
"Then, in 1921, she came to Columbia University. Professor
Boas, with his customary disregard for administrative rules, succeeded in giving her graduate credit for her work at the New
School . . . "113
Socialists manufacture doctorates for leftists
Ruth Benedict, still a housewife at 34, was quickly promoted
to high anthropological rank by Franz Boas strictly on the basis of
her socialistic background. He even managed to manipulate a Ph.D.
for her in three semesters by the device of giving her full credit for
a study at an unaccredited radical school as a basis for a Columbia
University Ph.D. degree. It is doubtful if anyone not having leftist
political connections would have been so favored. The record shows
that Goldenweiser and the New School for Social Research were responsible for training many other prominent anthropologists. Melville Herskovitz is one example. Herskovitz and Ruth Benedict, incidentally, were among the main authorities cited in a study of the
American Negro in Supreme Court decisions.114
Margaret Mead reports that "Patterns of Culture has gone
through 11 printings, has been translated into 14 languages, and has
become as timeless as the lives of the peoples on which it is based."
Margaret Mead admits the purpose of Ruth Benedict's work when
she stated that" ... Ruth Benedict, who came, unexpectedly into
a young science and shaped her thought into a book which for a
generation has stood as a bridge between those who cherish the
uniqueness of individual achievement and those who labor to order
the regularities in all human achievement." What is apparently
meant by the above statement in plain language is that Ruth Benedict's work served to convert belief in individual rights and freedoms
into belief in a socialized and regimented society.115
The highlight of Ruth Benedict's career came when she co-authored the booklet Races of Mankind with Gene Weltfish. This
book was issued by the Public Affairs Committee, a socialistic front
which included such radicals as Harry W. Laidler, George Soule and
Maxwell Stewart. Through sympathetic connections in government,
this group during World War II managed to get the U.S. War Department to issue this left-wing racial propaganda piece to our
military personnel.
Subsequent investigation of this matter caused considerable
furor, especially since Gene Weltfish was shown to be immersed in communist activity. Actually, the book represented a joint effort
by socialistic Ruth Benedict and Gene Weltfish of the communist
camp. Races of Mankind was finally banned as red propaganda. In
spite of this, Ruth Benedict subsequently occupied a number of
sensitive positions during wartime, including a position with the
Office of War Information.116
Shortly before her death (1948) Ruth Benedict received a
grant from the Carnegie Corporation. This tremendous multi-million
dollar foundation has been tapped for huge sums for projects clearly
designed to aid extreme leftist aims.
next, continued
All leftists agreed on racial line 201s
Notes
1 Patterns of Culture by Ruth Benedict, with an introduction by Franz Boas and preface by Margaret Mead, Mentor Books, 1959. Mead wrote: "Translated into 14 languages, with more than 800,000 copies printed in the Mentor edition alone. At this writing (l958·ed.). Patterns of Culture has helped to knit the sciences and the humanities together during a period when they had drawn very far apart." p.v,
2 See article by James Reston, New York Times, May 18, 1954, p. 14, where he relates the role of anthropology in the decision of the Supreme Court in the anti-segregation ruling.
3 See footnote 11 of the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education. U.S., May 17, 1954.
4 American Cyclopedia, edited by George Ripley and Charles Dana, D. Appleton & Co., N. Y. and London, Vol. I, p. 559. As mentioned previously, Ripley and Dana had met with Karl Marx in Europe. They were both pioneer leaders of the Fourierist socialist movement in this country around 1840. They had many contacts with Marxist elements in the United States, including Alfred Wedemeyer, Abraham Jacobi, and others.
5 Marx Engels Briefwechsel, Vol. III, Letter of Karl Marx, June 9, 1861, mentions Ripley and Dana in respect to his articles in the New York Tribune, p. 31. Aug. 26, 1857 Vol. II Marx mentions Ripley and Dana in connection with the Cyclopedia. Karl Marx was listed in the American Cyclopedia as a contributor, Vol. II, Briefwechsel, p. 265.
6 The Fabian socialist controlled Encyclopedia of Social Reforms (1898) edited hy W. D. P. Bliss, does not even list the subject of Anthropology in its index.
7 Quoted in Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th ed., Vol. 2, p, 107,1878.
8 lbid., p. 107.
9 American Cyclopedia (1883), Vol. 12, p. 216. "They (Negroes-ed.l lived undoubtedly much further north at a very remote time; but the immigration of the Mediterraneans (Caucasians), and especially the Hamites, across the Isthmus of Suez, compelled them to cede their original habitation to the superior foreigners. Bearing in mind the age of the Egyptian Empire, and the time previously needed for its establishment, it is considered probable that the Hamitic in. vaslon look place about 6000 B.C." American Cyclopedia, Vol. 6, (1883), p. 757, Prof. G. A. F. Von Rhyn.
10 Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th ed., Vol. 17, p, 318, Augustus Henry Keane F.R.
11 Marx Engels Briejsoechsel, Vol. III, Aug. 7, 1866, Marx to Engels.
12 ibid., Aug. 17, 1866. See also Z. Dobbs, Red Intrigue and Race Turmoil, p. 40.
13 The Origin 0/ the Family. Private Property, and the State. F. Engels, International Publishers (communist) 1942, p. 16.
14 ibid., pp 22·23.
15 Marx.Engels Brieiuiechsel. Vol. III, p, 424, Aug. 7, 1866, Marx to Engels.
16 Marx-Engels Briehoechsel; Vol. III, p, 431, Oct. 2, 1866, Engels to Marx.
17 The standard English definition of the word "nigger" during the lifetime of Marx and Engels was "nigger-a negro: in depreciation or derision". Ref.: Imperial Dictionary, London, 1883, Vol. 3, p. 259.
18 "Der judische Nigger Lassalle, der glücklicherWeise Ende dieser Woche abreist, hat glücklich wieder 5000 Taler in einer falschen spekulation veri oren." p. 100, letter of Marx to Engels, July 30, 1862, Briejuiechsel. "Die Zudringlichkeit, des Burschen ist auch niggerhaft," ibid., p. 102. (Marx was shedding crocodile tears over the fate of the Negro in the United States during this same period in the pages of the New York Daily Tribune, published and edited by Charles A. Dana and Horace Greeley. Both were acknowledged socialists. The Civil War was raging at the time. This double standard has been typical of socialists in respect to the Negro question ever since.)
19 Wilhelm Liebknecht, Karl Mar:v-Biographical Memoirs, Charles H. Kerr & Co., Chicago. 1907, p, 52.
20 ibid., p. 65. Karl Marx still believed wholeheartedly in the phrenological thesis 20 years later. On Jan. 11, 1868, he wrote: "So you see, phrenology is not the baseless art which Hegel imagined." p. 59, Letters to Kugelmann by Karl Marx, 1934. printed in the U.S.S.R.
21 ibid., pp. 49·50.
22 Marx influenced his followers in the United States (especially the Germans in Missouri and Wisconsin) to support John C. Fremont against Lincoln. After Lincoln was nominated and elected Marx wrote an article in Die Presse, Nov. 26, 1861 (Vienna) denouncing Lincoln as having "an aversion for all genius" and as a compromiser, p. 99. "Lincoln wages a political war. Even at the present time he is more afraid of Kentucky than of the entire north. He believes in the south." p. 203, article, Die Presse, Aug. 30, 1862, Civil War in the United States. International Publishers (communist) 1937.
23 Address of the International Workingmen's Association to Abraham Lincoln, Jan. 7,1865, authored by Karl Marx, Civil War in the United States, p, 281.
24 Abraham Lincoln Complete Works, edited by John G. Nicolay lind John Hay, Vol. I, Century Company, 1894, N. Y., all the above quotes can be found in page 289.
25 New York Tribune, Aug. 15, 1862, "The Colonization of the People of African Descent" - interview with President Lincoln (He holds that white and black races cannot dwell together.) p. 1.
26 American Cyclopedia, 1858-62, edited by Charles A. Dana and George Ripley, Appleton & Co., N. Y., see articles on NEGRO, ANTHROPOLOGY, NATURALIZATION, etc. Curiously, the second edition (1883) omitted the items previously dealt with under ANTHROPOLOGY.
27 Karl Marx wrote a large number of articles for the first American Cyclopedia under the name of Charles Marx.
28 Social Darwinism in American Thought, R. Hofstadter, George Braziller, Inc., N. Y., 1959, p. 186.
29 Social Darwinism in American Thought, R. Hofstadter. p, 64-65.
30 Culture, A. 1. Kroeber and Clyde KIuckhohn, Random House, Vintage books. N. Y., 1963, p. 47·53.
31 Modem Monthly, Oct. 1933, Vol. 7, No.9, (a radical magazine serving as sort of a trade journal for various socialistic and' communist groups) "Karl Marx and Max Stimer" translated by Sidney Hook, p. 554. Marx also wrote: "They" (interests-c-ed.) "are socially conditioned not psychologically primitive. They cannot be discovered merely by studying minds or bodies, immediate desires or thought. These are all mediated by a highly complex social environment which gives a definite cast to man's psychological drives." Modem Monthly, p, 569.
32 On September 21, 1890, Engels wrote in a private letter: "Marx and I are ourselves partly to blame for the fact that the younger people sometimes lay more stress on the economic side than is due to' it." -In the same communication, Engels wrote: "The economic situation is the basis, but the various elements of the superstructure political forms of the class struggle, and its results, to wit: constitutions established by the victorious class after a successful battle, etc., judicial forms, and even the reflexes of all these actual struggles in the brains of the participants, political, juristic, philosophic theories, religious views, and their further development into systems of dogmas--also exercise their influence upon the course of the historical struggles and in many cases preponderate in determining their form. There is an interaction of all these elements in which, amidst all the endless host of accidents (that is, of things and events whose inner interconnection is so remote or so impossible of proof that we can regard it is non-existent, as negligible), the economic movement finally asserts itself is necessary." Letter by Engels to Joseph Bloch, Sept. 21, 1890, Lewis S. Feuer, Editor, Marx & Engels, Doubleday Anchor Books, N. Y., 1959, pp, 398-399. (Joseph Bloch was the editor of the socialist publication Sozialistische monatshefte). "Political, juridical, philosophical, religious, literary, artistic, etc. development is based on economic development. But all these react upon one another and also upon the economic basis. It is not that the economic situation is cause, solely active, while everything else is only passive effect." Ibid., Letter of Engels to Heinz Starkenburg, Jan. 25, 1894, pp, 410-411.
33 In 1894, Engels laid down the theme which has been consistently carried out by all leftist cultural anthropologists, - that until there is a collectivist control and direction of society all events happen more or less accidentally and haphazardly and that the socialists will eventually change all that by a conscious direction. Engels wrote: "Men make their history themselves, but not as yet with a collective will according to a collective plan, or even in a definite, delimited given society. Their aspirations clash, and for that very reason all such societies are governed by necessity, the complement and form of appearance of which is accident" Ibid., p. 411.
34 The socialistically slanted American. Cyclopedia, 1859, had the following to say about this new cultural tactic: "This has culminated in what may be designated as a new science, which the Germans call Kulturgeschichte, Le., a history which treats of the moral, intellectual. social and political-economical, as well as political development of the people." "The same tendency to dwell upon the practical realities of life extends over many other departments of literature in Germany, and is most strongly expressed in many recent biographies and autobiographies, especially in that of Perthes. A more physiological method in these branches of investigation has been adopted by Riehl in his Naturgeschichte des Volks als Grundlage einet deutchen: Socialpolitik (3 vols., 1853.'5)." Part 22, pp. 225-26
35 New International Encyclopedia, Vol. 13, p. 386 (Kulturkampf).
36 American Journal 01 Sociology, May, 1916, article by Albion W. Small, "50 Years of Sociology in the United States", p. 766. "This designation" (social science and anthropology)" was never used by members of the staff. They promptly called the attention of the Board of Trustees to the fact that it was analogous with the conceivable title 'mathematics and algebra'. The trustees at once authorized the change of designation to 'sociology and anthropology'."
37 id, 164
38 Foundations of Sociology, E. A. Ross, Macmillan, N. Y. and London, 1905, p, 380.
39 Albion W. Small, "Fifty Years of Sociology in the United Stales". American Journal of Sociology, No.6, May 1916.
"At the same time, after the sociological movement began to gain momentum, everyone in it recognized him (Lester Ward) as its initiator in this country, and no one has approached him in grasp of the relations between cosmic evolution in general and the evolution of human associations," p, 752.
40 Social Forces, article by Bernhard J. Stem, Letters of Albion W. Small to Lester F. Ward, p. 1M, Dec. 1933.
41 Historical Sociology, Bernhard J. Stern, Citadel Press, N. Y., publication of selected papers as a memorial to Stern, 1959, p. 201. (Stern was a well-known communist, anthropologist and sociologist of the Boas school.) For further reference to C. Osborne Ward's socialistic writings see Charles Sotheran's Horace Greeley and Other Pioneers of American Socialism, p. 335.
42 The Case of the Rand School, p. 13.
43 Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Vol. 14, p. 99.
44 id.
45 Social Forces, article by Bernhard J. Stern, "Letters of Albion.W. Small to Lester F. Ward", Dec. 1933. In this same letter he wrote: "There are thousands of men who hold to the substance of the traditional evangelical doctrines, who are yet theoretically willing to be convinced that anyone of them is untenable. Supposing that some of these doctrines or the whole fabric of them may be false, it is better in dealing with such men, it seems to me to adopt Beecher's advice 'Don't let too many cats out of the bag at once'." pp. 165·166.
46 Ward, Dynamic Sociology, Vol. 1, pp. 418-19, Appleton & Co., 1883.
47 ibid., p, 423.
48 ROSS, along with Lester Ward, was an instructor at the Rand School of Social Science, which was operated by the American Socialist Society. His communist front activities are among the most extensive on record. See Appendix IX of the House Un-American Activities Committee, 1944' and the cumulative indices of that committee. See also: Report of the Joint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious Activities in the Senate of the State of New York, Vol. I, 1920, pp. 1113·14 for Ross's activities in the socialist-communist movement at that time. See also: The Socialist Party of America, Shannon with reference to Ross's socialist activities about 1904.
97 An Anthropologist at Work. Letter from Margaret Mead to Ruth Benedict, written from Sepik in New Guinea, 1933, p. 337.
7 Quoted in Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th ed., Vol. 2, p, 107,1878.
8 lbid., p. 107.
9 American Cyclopedia (1883), Vol. 12, p. 216. "They (Negroes-ed.l lived undoubtedly much further north at a very remote time; but the immigration of the Mediterraneans (Caucasians), and especially the Hamites, across the Isthmus of Suez, compelled them to cede their original habitation to the superior foreigners. Bearing in mind the age of the Egyptian Empire, and the time previously needed for its establishment, it is considered probable that the Hamitic in. vaslon look place about 6000 B.C." American Cyclopedia, Vol. 6, (1883), p. 757, Prof. G. A. F. Von Rhyn.
10 Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th ed., Vol. 17, p, 318, Augustus Henry Keane F.R.
11 Marx Engels Briejsoechsel, Vol. III, Aug. 7, 1866, Marx to Engels.
12 ibid., Aug. 17, 1866. See also Z. Dobbs, Red Intrigue and Race Turmoil, p. 40.
13 The Origin 0/ the Family. Private Property, and the State. F. Engels, International Publishers (communist) 1942, p. 16.
14 ibid., pp 22·23.
15 Marx.Engels Brieiuiechsel. Vol. III, p, 424, Aug. 7, 1866, Marx to Engels.
16 Marx-Engels Briehoechsel; Vol. III, p, 431, Oct. 2, 1866, Engels to Marx.
17 The standard English definition of the word "nigger" during the lifetime of Marx and Engels was "nigger-a negro: in depreciation or derision". Ref.: Imperial Dictionary, London, 1883, Vol. 3, p. 259.
18 "Der judische Nigger Lassalle, der glücklicherWeise Ende dieser Woche abreist, hat glücklich wieder 5000 Taler in einer falschen spekulation veri oren." p. 100, letter of Marx to Engels, July 30, 1862, Briejuiechsel. "Die Zudringlichkeit, des Burschen ist auch niggerhaft," ibid., p. 102. (Marx was shedding crocodile tears over the fate of the Negro in the United States during this same period in the pages of the New York Daily Tribune, published and edited by Charles A. Dana and Horace Greeley. Both were acknowledged socialists. The Civil War was raging at the time. This double standard has been typical of socialists in respect to the Negro question ever since.)
19 Wilhelm Liebknecht, Karl Mar:v-Biographical Memoirs, Charles H. Kerr & Co., Chicago. 1907, p, 52.
20 ibid., p. 65. Karl Marx still believed wholeheartedly in the phrenological thesis 20 years later. On Jan. 11, 1868, he wrote: "So you see, phrenology is not the baseless art which Hegel imagined." p. 59, Letters to Kugelmann by Karl Marx, 1934. printed in the U.S.S.R.
21 ibid., pp. 49·50.
22 Marx influenced his followers in the United States (especially the Germans in Missouri and Wisconsin) to support John C. Fremont against Lincoln. After Lincoln was nominated and elected Marx wrote an article in Die Presse, Nov. 26, 1861 (Vienna) denouncing Lincoln as having "an aversion for all genius" and as a compromiser, p. 99. "Lincoln wages a political war. Even at the present time he is more afraid of Kentucky than of the entire north. He believes in the south." p. 203, article, Die Presse, Aug. 30, 1862, Civil War in the United States. International Publishers (communist) 1937.
23 Address of the International Workingmen's Association to Abraham Lincoln, Jan. 7,1865, authored by Karl Marx, Civil War in the United States, p, 281.
24 Abraham Lincoln Complete Works, edited by John G. Nicolay lind John Hay, Vol. I, Century Company, 1894, N. Y., all the above quotes can be found in page 289.
25 New York Tribune, Aug. 15, 1862, "The Colonization of the People of African Descent" - interview with President Lincoln (He holds that white and black races cannot dwell together.) p. 1.
26 American Cyclopedia, 1858-62, edited by Charles A. Dana and George Ripley, Appleton & Co., N. Y., see articles on NEGRO, ANTHROPOLOGY, NATURALIZATION, etc. Curiously, the second edition (1883) omitted the items previously dealt with under ANTHROPOLOGY.
27 Karl Marx wrote a large number of articles for the first American Cyclopedia under the name of Charles Marx.
28 Social Darwinism in American Thought, R. Hofstadter, George Braziller, Inc., N. Y., 1959, p. 186.
29 Social Darwinism in American Thought, R. Hofstadter. p, 64-65.
30 Culture, A. 1. Kroeber and Clyde KIuckhohn, Random House, Vintage books. N. Y., 1963, p. 47·53.
31 Modem Monthly, Oct. 1933, Vol. 7, No.9, (a radical magazine serving as sort of a trade journal for various socialistic and' communist groups) "Karl Marx and Max Stimer" translated by Sidney Hook, p. 554. Marx also wrote: "They" (interests-c-ed.) "are socially conditioned not psychologically primitive. They cannot be discovered merely by studying minds or bodies, immediate desires or thought. These are all mediated by a highly complex social environment which gives a definite cast to man's psychological drives." Modem Monthly, p, 569.
32 On September 21, 1890, Engels wrote in a private letter: "Marx and I are ourselves partly to blame for the fact that the younger people sometimes lay more stress on the economic side than is due to' it." -In the same communication, Engels wrote: "The economic situation is the basis, but the various elements of the superstructure political forms of the class struggle, and its results, to wit: constitutions established by the victorious class after a successful battle, etc., judicial forms, and even the reflexes of all these actual struggles in the brains of the participants, political, juristic, philosophic theories, religious views, and their further development into systems of dogmas--also exercise their influence upon the course of the historical struggles and in many cases preponderate in determining their form. There is an interaction of all these elements in which, amidst all the endless host of accidents (that is, of things and events whose inner interconnection is so remote or so impossible of proof that we can regard it is non-existent, as negligible), the economic movement finally asserts itself is necessary." Letter by Engels to Joseph Bloch, Sept. 21, 1890, Lewis S. Feuer, Editor, Marx & Engels, Doubleday Anchor Books, N. Y., 1959, pp, 398-399. (Joseph Bloch was the editor of the socialist publication Sozialistische monatshefte). "Political, juridical, philosophical, religious, literary, artistic, etc. development is based on economic development. But all these react upon one another and also upon the economic basis. It is not that the economic situation is cause, solely active, while everything else is only passive effect." Ibid., Letter of Engels to Heinz Starkenburg, Jan. 25, 1894, pp, 410-411.
33 In 1894, Engels laid down the theme which has been consistently carried out by all leftist cultural anthropologists, - that until there is a collectivist control and direction of society all events happen more or less accidentally and haphazardly and that the socialists will eventually change all that by a conscious direction. Engels wrote: "Men make their history themselves, but not as yet with a collective will according to a collective plan, or even in a definite, delimited given society. Their aspirations clash, and for that very reason all such societies are governed by necessity, the complement and form of appearance of which is accident" Ibid., p. 411.
34 The socialistically slanted American. Cyclopedia, 1859, had the following to say about this new cultural tactic: "This has culminated in what may be designated as a new science, which the Germans call Kulturgeschichte, Le., a history which treats of the moral, intellectual. social and political-economical, as well as political development of the people." "The same tendency to dwell upon the practical realities of life extends over many other departments of literature in Germany, and is most strongly expressed in many recent biographies and autobiographies, especially in that of Perthes. A more physiological method in these branches of investigation has been adopted by Riehl in his Naturgeschichte des Volks als Grundlage einet deutchen: Socialpolitik (3 vols., 1853.'5)." Part 22, pp. 225-26
35 New International Encyclopedia, Vol. 13, p. 386 (Kulturkampf).
36 American Journal 01 Sociology, May, 1916, article by Albion W. Small, "50 Years of Sociology in the United States", p. 766. "This designation" (social science and anthropology)" was never used by members of the staff. They promptly called the attention of the Board of Trustees to the fact that it was analogous with the conceivable title 'mathematics and algebra'. The trustees at once authorized the change of designation to 'sociology and anthropology'."
37 id, 164
38 Foundations of Sociology, E. A. Ross, Macmillan, N. Y. and London, 1905, p, 380.
39 Albion W. Small, "Fifty Years of Sociology in the United Stales". American Journal of Sociology, No.6, May 1916.
"At the same time, after the sociological movement began to gain momentum, everyone in it recognized him (Lester Ward) as its initiator in this country, and no one has approached him in grasp of the relations between cosmic evolution in general and the evolution of human associations," p, 752.
40 Social Forces, article by Bernhard J. Stem, Letters of Albion W. Small to Lester F. Ward, p. 1M, Dec. 1933.
41 Historical Sociology, Bernhard J. Stern, Citadel Press, N. Y., publication of selected papers as a memorial to Stern, 1959, p. 201. (Stern was a well-known communist, anthropologist and sociologist of the Boas school.) For further reference to C. Osborne Ward's socialistic writings see Charles Sotheran's Horace Greeley and Other Pioneers of American Socialism, p. 335.
42 The Case of the Rand School, p. 13.
43 Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Vol. 14, p. 99.
44 id.
45 Social Forces, article by Bernhard J. Stern, "Letters of Albion.W. Small to Lester F. Ward", Dec. 1933. In this same letter he wrote: "There are thousands of men who hold to the substance of the traditional evangelical doctrines, who are yet theoretically willing to be convinced that anyone of them is untenable. Supposing that some of these doctrines or the whole fabric of them may be false, it is better in dealing with such men, it seems to me to adopt Beecher's advice 'Don't let too many cats out of the bag at once'." pp. 165·166.
46 Ward, Dynamic Sociology, Vol. 1, pp. 418-19, Appleton & Co., 1883.
47 ibid., p, 423.
48 ROSS, along with Lester Ward, was an instructor at the Rand School of Social Science, which was operated by the American Socialist Society. His communist front activities are among the most extensive on record. See Appendix IX of the House Un-American Activities Committee, 1944' and the cumulative indices of that committee. See also: Report of the Joint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious Activities in the Senate of the State of New York, Vol. I, 1920, pp. 1113·14 for Ross's activities in the socialist-communist movement at that time. See also: The Socialist Party of America, Shannon with reference to Ross's socialist activities about 1904.
49 Foundation. of Sociology, Ross, Macmillan Co., 1905, p, 356, issued by the Citizens Library, edited by Richard T. Ely. promoter of socialist ideas in academic circles.
50 ibid., p. 379.
51 ibid., p. 379.
52 Principles of Sociology, E. A. Ross, Appleton & Co. 1929, reprinted 1938, p. 256.
50 ibid., p. 379.
51 ibid., p. 379.
52 Principles of Sociology, E. A. Ross, Appleton & Co. 1929, reprinted 1938, p. 256.
53 Quoted in History of the Communist Party in the United States, Wm. Z. Foster, p.38. .
54 Previously, the term "culture" generally meant: the act, or the art of tilling the ground, or of raising crops by tillage; cultivation. 2. Improvement or melioration by effort." Joseph E. Worcester LL.d., Dictionary of the English Language, J. B. Lippincolt Co., Philadelphia, 1886, Vol. I, p. 347.
55 They Studied Man, Kardiner and Preble, World Publishing Company, Cleveland, 1961, p. 135.
56 See Marx-Engels Briehoeschel, Berlin, published under the direction of the Marx. Engels-Lenin Institute in Moscow, Vol. I, p. 256, 377, 379, 495, 591-95, 597, 600, 598, 613; Vol. 2, p. 117,209; Vol. 3, p. 216, 468. See also: Marx-Engels Selected Correspondence, published by Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, U.S.S.R. circa 1953, p. 598.
57 Marx-Engels Briehoechsel, Vol. 1, letter of Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels, Sept. 2, 1853, p. 600. IIi another letter dated July 17, 1855, Marx wrote: "Jacobi is making good business. The Yankees like his serious manner." Vol. 2, p. 117.
58 Letter from Marx to Engels, Marx-Engels Brieboeschel, dated June 16, 1864, Vol. 3, p. 216. .
59 The Encyclopedia Britannica classifies the Berliner Tageblatt as radical during the period of Boas's work for that paper. Vol. 19, l lth ed., p. 579
54 Previously, the term "culture" generally meant: the act, or the art of tilling the ground, or of raising crops by tillage; cultivation. 2. Improvement or melioration by effort." Joseph E. Worcester LL.d., Dictionary of the English Language, J. B. Lippincolt Co., Philadelphia, 1886, Vol. I, p. 347.
55 They Studied Man, Kardiner and Preble, World Publishing Company, Cleveland, 1961, p. 135.
56 See Marx-Engels Briehoeschel, Berlin, published under the direction of the Marx. Engels-Lenin Institute in Moscow, Vol. I, p. 256, 377, 379, 495, 591-95, 597, 600, 598, 613; Vol. 2, p. 117,209; Vol. 3, p. 216, 468. See also: Marx-Engels Selected Correspondence, published by Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, U.S.S.R. circa 1953, p. 598.
57 Marx-Engels Briehoechsel, Vol. 1, letter of Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels, Sept. 2, 1853, p. 600. IIi another letter dated July 17, 1855, Marx wrote: "Jacobi is making good business. The Yankees like his serious manner." Vol. 2, p. 117.
58 Letter from Marx to Engels, Marx-Engels Brieboeschel, dated June 16, 1864, Vol. 3, p. 216. .
59 The Encyclopedia Britannica classifies the Berliner Tageblatt as radical during the period of Boas's work for that paper. Vol. 19, l lth ed., p. 579
60 They Studied Man, p. 137.
61 See Boas' record in Appendix Part IX, Special Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, 1944, 62 listings of communist front activities. Also, see a listing of 33 communist front associations of Bons in 6,000 Educators, a compilation of leftist associations, edited by M. G. Lowman, published by Circuit Riders, Inc., Cincinnati, 1959.
62 See Shannon, The Socialist Party of America, relative to socialist background of most of the above. See also New Encyclopedia of Social Reform (908), Bliss, and The Case of the Rand School, 1920.
63 See Bending the Twig, Augustin G.. Rudd, The Heritage Foundation, Inc., Chicago 1957, relative to the leftist subversion of our schools via the "progressive education" technique.
61 See Boas' record in Appendix Part IX, Special Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, 1944, 62 listings of communist front activities. Also, see a listing of 33 communist front associations of Bons in 6,000 Educators, a compilation of leftist associations, edited by M. G. Lowman, published by Circuit Riders, Inc., Cincinnati, 1959.
62 See Shannon, The Socialist Party of America, relative to socialist background of most of the above. See also New Encyclopedia of Social Reform (908), Bliss, and The Case of the Rand School, 1920.
63 See Bending the Twig, Augustin G.. Rudd, The Heritage Foundation, Inc., Chicago 1957, relative to the leftist subversion of our schools via the "progressive education" technique.
64 Shannon, The Socialist Party 0/ America, p, 50. Report 0/ the Ioint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious Activities, State of New York, 1920, Part 1, Vol. 2· Mary White Ovington is quoted as writing: "As a socialist of many years standing, I have looked closely at the young colored men and women, graduates from our colleges, hoping to find some of them imhued with the revolutionary spirit." p. 1482.
65 20 Years 0/ Social Pioneering, published by the League for Industrial Democracy, No. 14, 1926, pp, 66,67. See also Keynes at Harvard, Veritas Foundation, 1963, N. Y.
66 Other prominent white socialistic figures during its formative days were: John Dewey, C. E. Russell, E. R. A. Seligman, Lillian Wald, Jane Addams, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise. See: The Crisis, official organ of the NAACP, December, 1910, p. 2.
67 The socialists took no chances in case the Booker T. Washington self-help theory should win out. They organized the National Urban League, a socialist-dominated organization with the purported aim of Negro self-help. Even it the Booker T. Washing· ton forces prevailed, the socialists stood to gain. The first president of the National Urban League was E . R. A. Seligman, pioneer publicist of socialistic philosophies. See Myrdal's An America Dilemma, p, 837.
65 20 Years 0/ Social Pioneering, published by the League for Industrial Democracy, No. 14, 1926, pp, 66,67. See also Keynes at Harvard, Veritas Foundation, 1963, N. Y.
66 Other prominent white socialistic figures during its formative days were: John Dewey, C. E. Russell, E. R. A. Seligman, Lillian Wald, Jane Addams, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise. See: The Crisis, official organ of the NAACP, December, 1910, p. 2.
67 The socialists took no chances in case the Booker T. Washington self-help theory should win out. They organized the National Urban League, a socialist-dominated organization with the purported aim of Negro self-help. Even it the Booker T. Washing· ton forces prevailed, the socialists stood to gain. The first president of the National Urban League was E . R. A. Seligman, pioneer publicist of socialistic philosophies. See Myrdal's An America Dilemma, p, 837.
68 Marx & Engels Basic Writings, edited by Lewis S. Feuer, Anchor Books. See article by Friedrich Engels, written in 1885, entitled "History of the Communist League", p. 461.
69 Franz Boas, "The Real Race Problem" in The Crisis magazine, official organ of the NAACP, December 1910, pp. 22·25.
70 In the New York Times, Sept. 13, 1963, John F. Kennedy is quoted as saying: "So I would say that, over the long run, we are going to have a mix. This will be true racially, socially, ethnically, geographically, and that's really, finally, the best way."
71 Mary White Ovington, Hal] A Man, prefaced by Franz Boas, Henry Holt & Co., N. Y., 1911, pp. vii to ix,
72 Bernhard J. Stem, article "Franz Boas as Scientist and Citizen" in Science & Sudety (communist) , Summer 1943, p, 299.
73 Friedrich Engels, The Origin of the Family (published 1885) American edition by Charles H. Kerr. 1902, p. 32.
74 Spiro, Marxism and the Bolshevik State, p. 781. See also The New American Cyclopedia, Part 4, Vol. 2, pp. 190·91, IBS8.
75 Spiro, Marxi.sm and the Bolshevik State, p, 781.
76 Cited in Historic Iudaica, Edmund SiIbemer, article "French Socialism and the Jewish Question", pp, 6, 7, April 1954. Regnard's work was Les Principles de la Revolution, London, 1875.
77id.
78 ibid., Silherner, p, 10.
79 E. Silberner, Scripta Hierosolymisana; pp, 388·390.
80 Spiro, Marxism and the Bolshevik State, p. 888.
81 E. A. Ross, Social Control, Macmillan. Co., 1901, pp. 3, 17, 19, 439440. By the South Ross meant the Spanish, Italian BDd French peoples.
82 Shannon, The Socialist Party o] America, p. 50, quoting from Social Democratic Herald, May 31, 1902.
69 Franz Boas, "The Real Race Problem" in The Crisis magazine, official organ of the NAACP, December 1910, pp. 22·25.
70 In the New York Times, Sept. 13, 1963, John F. Kennedy is quoted as saying: "So I would say that, over the long run, we are going to have a mix. This will be true racially, socially, ethnically, geographically, and that's really, finally, the best way."
71 Mary White Ovington, Hal] A Man, prefaced by Franz Boas, Henry Holt & Co., N. Y., 1911, pp. vii to ix,
72 Bernhard J. Stem, article "Franz Boas as Scientist and Citizen" in Science & Sudety (communist) , Summer 1943, p, 299.
73 Friedrich Engels, The Origin of the Family (published 1885) American edition by Charles H. Kerr. 1902, p. 32.
74 Spiro, Marxism and the Bolshevik State, p. 781. See also The New American Cyclopedia, Part 4, Vol. 2, pp. 190·91, IBS8.
75 Spiro, Marxi.sm and the Bolshevik State, p, 781.
76 Cited in Historic Iudaica, Edmund SiIbemer, article "French Socialism and the Jewish Question", pp, 6, 7, April 1954. Regnard's work was Les Principles de la Revolution, London, 1875.
77id.
78 ibid., Silherner, p, 10.
79 E. Silberner, Scripta Hierosolymisana; pp, 388·390.
80 Spiro, Marxism and the Bolshevik State, p. 888.
81 E. A. Ross, Social Control, Macmillan. Co., 1901, pp. 3, 17, 19, 439440. By the South Ross meant the Spanish, Italian BDd French peoples.
82 Shannon, The Socialist Party o] America, p. 50, quoting from Social Democratic Herald, May 31, 1902.
• 83 What's ~o and What isn't, John M. Work, Charles H. Kerr Co., 1905, pp. 140·142. TIns was a major political publication for American Socialists of which several hundred thousand copies were printed and were still being distributed 20 years after the original publication.
84 Herbert J. Seligmann, Race Against Man, introduction by Franz Boas, Putnam, N. Y., 1939, pp. 18-28. See also: A. Hitler, Mein Kampf, ReynalI & Hitchcock, pp. 19-40.
85.The nazis came into power under the banner of the National Socialist German Workers Party.
86 The Socialist Party of America, Shannon, p. 165.
87 Margaret Mead and M. F. Ashley-Montagu can be likened to the socialistic faction and Gene Weltfish and Bernhard J. Stern were allied with the communist political machine.
An example of anthropology presented openly as a weapon for bringing about socialism can be seen in Calverton's The Making 0/ Man-An. Outline of Anthropology, 1931, Modern Library, Random House.
88 Calverton, The Making of Man, Modem Library, 1931, p. 29.
89 ibid., pp. 3 & 4.
90 ibid., p. 25.
91 The items quoted above were printed originally in the American Journal 01 Sociology, March, 1931.
92 Consult Margaret Mead, An Anthropologist at Work (Passim).
93 ibid-passim.
94 An Anthropologist at Work, p, 336, letter from Margaret Mead to Ruth Benedict, 1933.
95 ibid., p. 336,
96 Margaret Mead, An Anthropologist at Ifl"ark. "And I keep thinking, that it's so very important that you should write the book and that I've been wanting you to write it for the last five years and that if I should discourage you about it, I'd be miserable." p. 335.
98 Anthropology A to Z (Universal Reference Library) edited by Carleton S. Coon and Edward E. Hunt, Jr., Grsset & Dunlap, N. Y., 1963, p. 132.
99 Patterns 0/ Culture, R. Benedict, pp. 151-152.
100 See also: pp 238-9, Patterns 0/ Culture.
101 Max Lerner, America as a Civilization. In this book, Lerner who is a distillation of both the communist and socialist movements, gives the typical picturization declaring that "The Puritan qualities were intense, inverted, crotchety, rather than judicious or humanist." ".... the Puritans considered human nature vile and kept an eye on the next world, but the other eye was kept lustily on the enterprises of this world. Their heritage accounts for much in the American combination of the visionary and the pragmatic, the righteous and the profitable." pp. 20·21. Lerner quotes, with relish, the socialistic Henry Adams who wrote that the Puritan type "had learned also to love the pleasure of hating". Lerner closes Volume I of his work by accusing the Puritan of having "the profit complex" and the "success complex". p. 462.
102 As previously noted a number of mercantile speculators were burned to death by the socialistic guilds of Nuremberg during the Middle Ages, This sort of treatment was described by the socialist W. D. P. Bliss as "a just cruelty". Apparently, socialists do not object to the burning of human beings per se but only object to such cruelty if perpetrated by those whom they considered social enemies. See: New Encyclopedia 0/ Social Reform, edited by W. D. P. Bliss, Funk & Wagnall, 1908, pp, 841-42.
103 Patterns of Culture, pp. 238·39. Ruth Benedict, in an article entitled "Anthropology and the Abnormal", in the Journal of General Psychology, Vol. X, No.2, 1934, pp, 59-82, restates the above thesis almost verbatim, and also says: "There is a further corollary. From the point of view of absolute categories of abnormal psychology, we must expect in any culture to find a large proportion of 103 (cont.) the most extreme abnormal types among those who from the local point of view are farthest from belonging to this category. The culture, according to its major preoccupations, will increase and intensify hysterical, epileptic, or paranoid symptoms, at the same time relying socially in a greater and greater degree upon these very individuals. Western civilization allows and culturally honors gratifications of the ego which according to any absolute category would be regarded as abnormal. The portrayal of unbridled and arrogant egoists as family men, as officers of the law, and in business has been a favorite topic of novelists, and they are familiar in every community. Such individuals are probably mentally warped to a greater degree than many inmates of our institutions who are nevertheless socially unavailable. They are extreme types of those personality configurations which our civilization fosters."
104 ibid., p, 217.
105 ibid.; p. 195.
106 ibid., pp. 214·215. Middletown is a symbol created by Robert S. Lynd, sociologist at Columbia University for many years, and a colleague of Ruth Benedict and Franz Boas. Lynd has a record of communist and socialist affiliations which are too lengthy for listing here. He was a board member of the American Civil Liberties Union, a socialist front. His study called Middletown was a compendium denigrating private enterprise and individual ambition. It was a leftist oriented book pretending to be an impartial study.· .
107 Actually, these 20th century leftists got their signals crossed. Friedrich Engels, one of the true fathers of cultural anthropology, had made the observation that the Pueblo Indians, of which the Zuni were a part, were of inferior nature. He ascribed their inferiority to lack of a meat diet. Ref.: The Origin of the Family, International Publishers, pp, 22-23.
108 An Anthropologist at Work, p. 208. The Encyclopedia of Social Sciences gives Nietzsche credit for influence in the socialist movements of Germany and Switzerland, and claims that the Communist Spartacus Revolt of 1918 was inspired by his teachings. They also mention that Hitler's National Socialist Movement also claimed Nietzsche as one of their intellectual ancestors. Nietzsche died in 1900 after having been completely insane since 1889. Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Vol. 2, pp, 373-375. See also, A. Hitler Mein Kampf, pp. 127, 359, 398 and 581 and A. Hitler My New Order and his speech delivered Sept. 3, 1933 at Nuremberg where he invokes the authority of Nietzsche, p, 208, An Anthropologist at Work.
109 The Making of Man. Calverton, article by Ruth Benedict, entitled ''The Science of Custom", p, 813.
110 ibid.• p. 817.
111 "The New School for Social Research which has been established by men who belong to the ranks of near-Bolshevik intelligentsia." Joint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious Activities in the Senate of the State of New York, April 24, 1920, VoL I, p. 1121. Columbia Encyclopedia, p. 1391. ''The founders included Charles A. Beard, John Dewey, James Harvey Robinson and Thorstein Veblen." (All these men have a record of socialist and/or communist activities). 112 Who's Who, 1930·31, p, 926. "Goldenweiser interested both Ruth Benedict and Melville Herskovitz who entered anthropology from the New School at the same period." An Anthropologist at Work, pv B, "Lecturer on Anthropology and Psychology, at Rand School for Social Science since 1915." "On editorial staff Encyclopedia for Social Sciences since 1928." Who's Who, 1930-31, p. 926. Rand School for Social Science was a socialist training school run by the American Socialist Society.
113 An Anthropologist at Work, p. 9. Ruth Benedict wrote a memoir to Goldenweiser in a radical socialist magazine and in her opening sentence stated "I went to see Dr. Goldenweiser about taking a course with him during the first year of the New School for Social Research. 1 was an unemployed wife with no knowledge of anthropology, and he took me on as a neophyte." "After a year of this work he sent me to Dr. B035 and Dr. Lowie and suggested that I take work with them also," Modern Quarterly-A Journal of Radical Opinion, Summer 1940, Vol. XI, No.6.
114 See index of Myrdal's An American Dilemma.
115 An Anthropologist at Work, p. xv-xvi, Margaret Mead's activities were also socialistic in background as indicated by her contribution to Modern Quarterly, a Journal of Radical Opinion (socialist) Summer, 1940, Vol. XI, No.6, pp. 33-34. Margaret Mead was also active with the Colonial Fabian Bureau. This was part of the British Fabian Socialist Society. Ref.: Sister M. Margaret Patricia McCan-an's unpublished manuscript Fabianism in the United States, pp, 228-29, 244
No comments:
Post a Comment