Jack Posobiec and Joshua Lisec have written a timely and masterful study of how Marxists take over nations, usually under the guise of building a socialist Utopia. The end is predictably the same: economic collapse, innumerable political prisoners, the destruction and seizure of private property, the disappearance of civil liberties and the widespread loss of human life. From Skyhorse Publishing:
If you don't understand communist revolutions, you aren't ready for what's coming.
The old rules are over. The old order is over. Accusations are evidence. Activism means bigotry and hate. Criminals are allowed to roam free. Citizens are locked up. An appetite for vengeance is unleashed—to deplatform, debank, destroy. This is the daily news, yet none of it's new. Patterns from the past make sense of our present. They also foretell a terrifying future we might be condemned to endure.
For nearly 250 years, far-left uprisings have followed the same battle plans—from the first call for change to last innocent executed, from denial a revolution is even happening to declaration of the new order. Unhumans takes readers on a shocking, sweeping, and succinct journey through history to share the untold stories of radical takeovers that textbooks don't teach.
And there is one conclusion: We're in a new revolution right now.
But this is not a book about ideology or politics. Unhumans reveals that communism, socialism, Marxism, and all other radical-isms are not philosophies but tactics—tactics that are specifically designed to unleash terror on everyday people and revoke their human rights to life, liberty, and property. These are the forces of unhumanity. This is what they do. Every. Single. Time. Unhumans steals their playbook, breaks apart their strategies piece by piece, and lays out the tactics of what it takes to fight back—and win, using real-world examples. (Read more.)
My review:
This is what they do. Such is the refrain in Jack Posobiec's Unhumans, published in July 2024 by War Room Books, with Steve Bannon composing the Foreword. Communists are referred to as "Unhumans" because of the inhumanity they repeatedly display, including the complete disregard for human life. I was reminded of the joint Nazi/Soviet invasion of Poland in 1940, as told in a book I helped to write, and how the bodies of the starved and massacred were left in piles in the streets and by the railway stations. Beginning with the French Revolution, which was a Communist revolt decades before Marx and Engels made the word their own, several past societal upheavals we call "revolutions" are used to illustrate how close America has come to being a socialist dictatorship, especially in the last four years. The Russian Revolution, Maoist China, the Pol Pot regime, are some of the major examples used to illustrate the methods of the Unhumans. The tactics are the same: gaining control of the media so that through propaganda any resistance can be blackened while creating social chaos and economic uncertainty. Meanwhile, the Spanish Civil War is used to show how determined resistance can overtake and foil a Communism takeover.
A couple of points made in the book I disagree with, such as the characterization of medieval feudalism as being designed to keep people in their place. Feudal society was designed to maintain a steady food supply, so that the peasants and everyone else could eat, and so armies could march and friars could preach, etc. Keeping the peasants bound to the land was part of this but no one was going around saying, "Keep those peasants down in the dirt" just for the joy of it. Social mobility did exist in medieval times, mostly through the Church, which was a means of people of lowly rank receiving an education and getting ahead in the world. Similarly, just because someone was a peasant did not mean they were impoverished. The father of Joan of Arc was technically a peasant but well-to do, and able to rent a castle for his fellow villagers to take refuge in when the English attacked. On the other hand, Elizabeth of Hungary, Duchess of Thuringia died in penury at age 24 in a hospital for lepers.
Another point I take would like to clarify is the characterization of Louis XVI. When the Revolution began in 1789, Louis XVI resolved that he would not shed
the blood of his own people. He had studied the life of Charles I of
England, his great-great-great-great grandfather, who had been labelled a
"Man of Blood" for fighting his subjects in the English Civil Wars. In Unhumans, Louis is accused of not doing anything to stop the carnage but after October 5, 1789 he was more or less a political prisoner under house arrest, although under the new constitution he had limited executive powers. Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette resolved to do the opposite of everything Charles I and Henrietta Maria had done, but the results were equally disastrous. When the French Royal Family tried to escape from Paris in June 1791 they were headed to Montmédy on the border where there was a loyal garrison. There the King meant to take a stand, and perhaps send his family to safety over the border. The entire family was, however, betrayed and captured at Varennes. But Louis was still playing by the old rules. He thought when he told the Swiss Guard to surrender their arms on August 10, 1792 they would be allowed to walk away free; he had not grasped that the people he was dealing with hated chivalry and fair play as much as they hated the Church and the monarchy. And so the Swiss Guard were massacred, and the Reign of Terror began.
In spite of what the book says, there was nevertheless a civil war in France, called the War of the Vendée (1793-1796), in which the peasants of western France helped to form the Catholic and Royal Army which, under the leadership of such patriots as Charette and La Rochejaquelein, fought against the Revolutionary forces. They were crushed, however, and there were horrendous massacres of the peasantry, who refused to accept the atheistic new order.
Of course, atheism is the constant characteristic of Marxist Revolutions, once the Unhumans gain ascendancy, although they may tolerate religion in the beginning as it suits their purposes. Furthermore, Marx himself wanted to rid the world of Judeo-Christian morality and advocated having young women available for the sexual gratification of men, with no strings attached, even if children were born, to be supported by the State. That way the government could own the children, control them, while breaking up family life and the need for private property. Posobiec's book gives several documented examples of this disaster, including what we have seen in our own country since the sexual revolution of the 60's and 70's.
I beg everyone to read this book. I think it would be especially helpful for older teens and young adults to understand the pattern of behavior which characterize a Marxist revolution, so they can be prepared. Because...this is what they do.
Buy your copy HERE.
Book is discussed on our local GOP podcast, HERE.
No comments:
Post a Comment