It is significant that the resurgance of Islam comes at a time of Western self doubt and cultural decay.

As they say about any mechanism “If you don’t know how to put it together,don’t take it apart”.

I initially thought Bill Wood was a US Representative when I read your link. That apparently is not the case.

If you want to get further information on Gramscian Marxism and how it has been transmitted into mainstream politics, try googling “gramsci frankfurt school”

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=gramsci+frankfurt+school

I found this link at unjobs.org particularly revealing:

http://unjobs.org/books/frankfurt-school-of-sociology

If you want to know what aspiring UN bureacrats read, go have a look.

I found Mr. Wood through this website, http://www.ejfi.org/ where he has published another article. The political position of that site itself is, interestingly, a bit difficult to determine, perhaps attesting to the higher level of cultural conflict that it addresses – in other words, stuff beyond mere partisnaship. I do not think Wood is a Member of Congress, and I am not sure to what extent this kind of “submission” or “testimnony” is actually read by Members or staff – if at all.

I emailed him and he did reply, and I did ask that question – about the testimony’s potential impact. I have yet to get a further reply.

Heres the link again to Gramsci’s theory of hegemony,saves scrolling back up.

http://www.theory.org.uk/ctr-gram.htm#hege

Do you know the circumstances under which Wood gave that statement?

Thanks for the link to Bill Wood’s statement. It is tremendously encouraging that some of our elected representatives are beginning to grasp the extent to which Gramscian Marxist rot is corrupting our society.

Keep spreading the word…

Thank you for the link. I also highly recommend to all the article (really testimony submitted to the House Ways and Means Committee) which is linked in my post just above. I intend to circulate these articles to my friends among the POWs and Swift Vets and other military veteran activists groups, who are currently on R&R not far from the battlefield, on guard and awaiting developments.

Here is the article I first read about Gramscian Marxism. Reading this article was an epiphany for me. I read it, and suddenly everything about contemporary politics began to make sense:

http://www.policyreview.org/dec00/Fonte.html

I apologize for not being able to articulate this (i’ve never been able to quite put my finger on how to describe this), but to complete the “justice” part, everyone must be equally criminal/guilty.

Hayek gives some insight to your difficulty in articulating what the term “social justice” means. In his view, the term is deliberately vague. I googled Hayek and social justice and found the following description which fits perfectly:

From this line of reasoning it follows that “social justice” would have its natural end in a command economy in which individuals are told what to do, so that it would always be possible to identify those in charge and to hold them responsible. This notion presupposes that people are guided by specific external directions rather than internalized, personal rules of just conduct. It further implies that no individual should be held responsible for his relative position. To assert that he is responsible would be “blaming the victim.” It is the function of “social justice” to blame somebody else, to blame the system, to blame those who (mythically) “control” it. As Leszek Kolakowski wrote in his magisterial history of communism, the fundamental paradigm of Communist ideology is guaranteed to have wide appeal: you suffer; your suffering is caused by powerful others; these oppressors must be destroyed. We need to hold someone accountable, Hayek notes, even when we recognize that such a protest is absurd.

http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0012/opinion/novak.html