This group of Marxists have a large pool (approximately 10 000 in Norway) of non-violent
activists which they rally and demonstrate with (not including their Muslim support
groups). The Marxist political party “Rødt” (Red) is a micro party with only 1700
members. KrF – Christian Democrats in comparison have 38 000 members, Senterpartiet
have 22 000, even the small cultural conservative party Demokratene (Democrats) have
5000 members. SV (Socialist Left Party) have 9000 members but only a fraction is as
active on the demo front as Rødts members. Many of SVs members are “sofa-radicals”,
especially among the older members.
The Marxist party Rødt is extremely efficient when it comes to organising events and
arranging various demonstrations. Their leaders are aggressively creating “front-
organisations” everywhere. An alternative strategy they are known for is to infiltrate
other established organisations and reform them from within: f. example Natur &
Ungdom (Nature and Youth - a well known environmental activist organisation) and
Målungdommen (cultural organisation dedicated to promoting Norwegian dialects). They
were also founding organisations such as “Samebevegelsen” (A Sami minority
organisation) in the 70s and several other minority organisations. They created
Kvinnefronten (Feminist Front) and several important environmental organisations.
Nevertheless, RV/AKP/Rødt have lost control of a couple of the organisations they helped
create such as Anti-Rasistisk Senter (Anti-Racist Center) and a couple of other minority
organisations. However, they are still ideologically close to them and they usually end up
demonstrating/rally together in order to create the biggest possible alliance.
An average Rødt (Red) activist is a member of 10-15 other organisations. This is how
they manage to convert a single voice into something ten times as powerful (a form of
force-multiplication). They use each of the organisations in the public debate to maximise
media penetration. In comparison, where the second largest political party in Norway –
FrP (a moderate cultural conservative political party) only have one single voice, hardcore
Marxists have 20-30 voices in the public debate through various organisations spanning
over several fields. I would say every single Rødt member is worth 50 times as much as
each FrP member and more than 1000 times as much as an average Norwegian
pensioner when it comes to influencing society. Not really how we would imagine a
democracy?! The reason is because the average Rødt member is so active when it comes
to aggressively seeking positions of influence in addition to attending and organising
various demonstrations and events. These individuals are actively seeking influence in
many aspects of society through various fronts and disguises. As such, the direction of
the public debate and development is highly influenced by a relatively small Marxist
faction of the population, namely those who organise and participate through various
fronts, NGOs and interest groups which they again use to pressure politicians.
This is one of the primary reasons why today’s politicians, media and NGO leaders (who
predominantly propagate cultural Marxist doctrines) are pushing an agenda that the
majority of the people oppose on several key areas. I mean, common, who wants to see
a de-Christianisation of Europe or a systematical destruction of European traditions,
culture, identity and nation states? The politicians are continuously pressured from a
multitude of fronts, idealistic organisations created or infiltrated by the cultural Marxist
68 generation in Norway and Western Europe in general. Many of these politicians chose
the path of least resistance and allow themselves to be manipulated by the “dominant
elite Marxist mob”. They do not care about public opinion or the will of the people. Their
standard tactic is to bulldoze over the public opinion, the will of the people and any
poorly organised resistance (the silent and poorly organised majority). They use labelling
techniques and other fascist authoritarian means to achieve their goals: their goals being
political domination and implementation of Marxist doctrines. Multiculturalism is to them
a tool to effectively destroy every shred of European culture and identity in order to
implement a borderless Marxist utopia. Their alliance with Islam is only a short term
strategy until everything European has been destroyed. They will then destroy Islam
(they hope) and include all the ex-Muslims in the utopian Marxist borderless super state.
So who is the typical member and from where do they recruit new members? How
motivated are they and how far are they willing to go to achieve their goals?
The cultural Marxist extremists in Rødt and similar Marxist organisations recruit primarily
young idealists from secondary schools, high schools and other youth arenas. They often
recruit under false and deceptive idealistic banners we all have sympathy for (anti-racist,
pro-minority, pro-gay, anti-war, pro-environment, pro-wildlife, helping Palestinian
children and similar organisations). These cover organisations are again exploiting the
system (or perhaps the system was designed for this…) by receiving public funding per
member. This is another reason why the average hardcore Marxist is a member of 15-20
organisations at once.
As an illustration:
The cultural conservative political party FrP with 25 000 members receive approximately
150 NOK in public funding per member which totals 3,75 million NOK (450k Euro) per
year in public subsidies. In addition FrP charges 200 NOK from each member per year.
Now, the busy little bees of Rødt (1700 members) and allied cultural Marxist
organisations control more than 15-20 NGOs. They cynically set the annual member fee
to a minimum (5-50 NOK) and actively pursue their pool of 50 000 or so sympathisers
for cross-membership (membership in several organisations).
The result is 15-20 NGOs under their control with extremely bloated member lists (cross
members). By using this strategy they gain an un-proportionate amount of influence,
something they know perfectly well how to take advantage of. In addition, they earn
millions of Euro annually. Our journalists refuse to pursue this abuse of power as 99% of
Norwegian journalists are multiculturalists and thus have certain sympathies for more
hardcore political entities.
The Marxist activists are having a field day every single autumn when the new students
arrive from small towns and rural areas to attend our various Marxist dominated
universities. During the introductory week each autumn these Marxists political activists
spend a lot of time recruiting new students. They usually arrange the coolest parties,
have the coolest student social clubs, the most active student organisations and usually
create the best marketing brochures and effects.
In the universities they recruit their members from the country’s future power elite and
they gradually and systematically channel these new conscripts into their social networks
for more ideological indoctrination.
Rødt has a front-organisation for everything, something for almost every imaginable
taste: for solidarity with Africa or Palestine, for the environment, for feminism, for
promotion of dialects, against rape, for human rights, against commercial, for asylum
seekers, against capitalism, for culture (rock, hip-hop, art etc), for international
solidarity, against Christianity, against pornography, etc. it goes on and on.
And the new naive students are channeled through these numerous smaller fronts where
they are presented with more indoctrination from already established and more
experienced Marxists. Some of these new recruits end up in the political party Rødt or in
their newspaper Klassekampen (War of the Classes). The end result (after attending
university) is a new generation of hardcore leftist political activists ready to continue to
implement Marxist doctrines in society. The new generation Marxists recruited from the
best of our youth right under our nose.
However, after a few years, a majority of these students realise how the world works and
reject some of the earlier teachings. Many of them end up as highly influential
individuals, moderate cultural Marxists (multiculturalists) and support more moderate
leftist doctrines along the lines of the Labour Party. These individuals very often seek
power positions within politics, government agencies, politically oriented NGOs, media
companies and within the education sector.
It’s worth noting that areas the Marxist are unable to penetrate and dominate are
faculties in the fields of economics and law which on the other hand is dominated by
cultural conservatives. This also includes the police academies the military and several
private sector fields.
Marxist organisations such as Rødt and their many Blitz, AFA, SOS fronts therefore
function as initial recruitment centers or boot camps for the more established and
moderate leftist movements which continue to dominate Western European regimes.
This is the reason why the Labour Party and other leading European political parties keep
a protective hand over the extreme Marxist movements like Rødt, AFA, Blitz, UAF etc.
The European cultural Marxist establishment’s relationship with extreme and even violent
Marxist youth organisations is equivalent to the relationship the NSDAP had to
Hitlerjugend and similar organisations in the previous century. Why would they contribute
to destroy their own boot camps?
If we, the cultural conservatives want to democratically succeed in the future we simply
have to copy these strategies. The problem here however is that cultural conservatives
(and most anti-Marxists) generally lack an idealistic and voluntary mindset. I can
personally attest to this. I didn’t originally intend to work for free as an ideological
warrior. I, as a majority of my friends, was driven by the lust for personal acquisition and
prestige like a majority of cultural conservatives. Screw everything and everyone right, it
was me, myself and I. Why do you think the Marxist 68 generation managed to
successfully implement multiculturalism and various other Marxist doctrines? Where the
hell was the cultural conservative 68 generation? The answer is simple. They didn’t care
about politics as they generally lacked an idealistic mindset and were instead busy
working, providing for their families. Many worked as small business owners or with
economics and law. Our parent generation (the 68 cultural conservative generation) had
the same flaws we have today. We are egotistical and greedy zealots driven by our lust
for personal acquisitions/prestige completely lacking a political idealistic drive.
There are still many of us who have always been or at least have become politically
active and we might witness a trend shift. This is because an increasing number of
people are waking up and seeing that much of what they learned at school or read in the
MSM press is a lie. That our societies are spiraling down fast towards the abyss and we
have to stop it. But tbh. I doubt we can ever fully match the idealistic spirit of the Marxist
as it is not in our nature. Historically, we have usually waited until the last possible
second before reasserting control. This is not something we can rely on as it is simply too
risky. We can’t risk waiting until the Muslims are 50% of the population or we will end up
as Lebanon, as a terrorised dhimmi minority in our own lands. The worst case scenario
would be that we are completely and utterly annihilated by Marxist-Islamic forces. The
Marxists will be wiped out by the Muslims as well, but at that point, we are already dead.
Small groups of hardcore Marxists act as force-multipliers and control (through hard work
and a myriad of organisations) an extremely disproportionate amount of the public
debate and direction. The extreme Marxist youth organisations operate as boot camps for
the moderate and established political leftist parties and organisations.
This proves that a micro minority has the potential to exert a massive amount of
influence in a country if they play their cards correctly. As few as 50-100 politically active
individuals CAN considerably influence a country of 4-5 million. The same principle
applies for the international community as well. The global cultural Marxist mafia (the
current world order) now effectively control all Western European countries (Greece, Italy
and Denmark excluded), the US (Obama), Canada, the UN and a majority of the major
NGOs. The cultural conservatives MUST copy the organisational efforts of the Marxists
locally, nationally and internationally.
There are numerous international examples of micro groups influencing a country or area
disproportionally as they operate as force-multipliers.
Examples are the Taliban (less than 5%) in Pakistan. A small group can cause civil war
and inflict havoc in a country. The multiculturalists are saying that it is unproblematic
that 5-15% of Western European Muslims support Al Qaeda ideologically. WRONG. 5-
15% can bring any country to its knees!
10% of the Ummah make out more than 140 million individuals. If only half of them
(5%) declare Jihad the results will be irreversibly catastrophic. The Bolsheviks where only
counted a few hundred in 1910, the National Socialists was a micro party before the
crack in 1929 etc.
2.76 Public opposition to Islamisation translated into success for political
It has been found that in the country where the public is the most opposed to
Islamisation, Greece, there is no successful populist right party, but that in two of the
three Scandinavian countries where the public is the least opposed to Islamisation, there
is such a party.
The gist of the findings of such studies is that opposition to Islamisation is widespread in
all Western European countries. The question they raise
is, why is this opposition not translated into success for anti-immigrant parties in certain
countries like Sweden, Germany and the UK?
The answer is:
It is not the message itself but rather the credibility of the actor who delivers it that
makes the crucial difference. "Reputational shields" are therefore thought to be helpful to
political parties on three levels:
- 1. As a valuable resource for the anti-immigrant party in elite debate
- 2. As external justification for voters
- 3. As internal justification for voters.
Documents you may be interested
Documents you may be interested