Copying Marxist organisational strategies and networks – locally, nationally and internationally

The following study was conducted in Norway but many of the results and findings apply locally, nationally and internationally.

Comparison (political influence vs. number of members/supporters):

FrP (Progress Party – mod. cultural conservatives) – 23% – 25k members

Rø dt (Red – Marxists) – 1, 3% in 09 election – 1, 7k members

They are violent and few but they are extremely effective and talented at what they do. A relatively small group (50-100) of hardcore Norwegian Marxists are doing a remarkable job at gaining and exercising political influence in various fronts. In order for conservatives to succeed, they must copy the Marxist strategies. We must actively use deceit and use our networks as force-multipliers so that we may manage to exercise a disproportionate amount of influence. Let’s try to look at their methods and organisational structure/pattern and draw some conclusions on how cultural conservatives can learn and improve on organisational strategies.

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 “ Rø dt ” (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 Rø dts members. Many of SVs members are “sofa-radicals”, especially among the older members.

The Marxist party Rø dt 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 Må lungdommen (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 / Rø dt 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 Rø dt (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 Rø dt 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 Rø dt 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 Rø dt 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 Rø dt (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.

Rø dt 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 Rø dt 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 Rø dt 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 Rø dt, 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.

Conclusion:

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.