The Cold War: Subversion, Infiltration, and Terror

Will Rogers said that everyone is ignorant – only on different subjects. Of Vietnam, more than most places, it can be said that there are no experts, only varying degrees of ignorance.

Marguerite Higgins [i]

Marguerite Higgins was a war correspondent who covered significant events in the Korean and Vietnam Wars. She died in 1966 at the age of 45 from a tropical/subtropical disease she got in Vietnam. Her statement above might be applied to the Cold War; for it can be said that there are no real experts on the Cold War. It is so vast a subject, with so many moving parts, that few historians can see the whole of it (or the essence of it). Even a Cold War historian and master of the facts like John Lewis Gaddis revealed his inability to digest the terrifying truth about Soviet communism when he suggested the United States had overreacted to the Soviet threat. This overreaction was sincere, he explained, but then he added, “Fear, after all, can be genuine without being rational.”[ii]

Gaddis thought America had no rational reason to fear communism. Here we are left to question the historian’s rationality. Communist leaders have often stated their world revolutionary ambitions. But that was just talk, right? A liberal professor might say that we should consider the more pragmatic policies of Lenin and Stalin, which supposedly prove that they were always ready to make peace with capitalism. Here we are asked to forget the murderous criminality of the communist leaders, and to omit their aggressive schemes. The Nazis never got this same benefit of the doubt. John Lewis Gaddis would have never dared to write that the Western powers overreacted to Hitler’s aggression in 1939. A double standard is clearly visible in our historian’s treatment of the communists. This is because the communists are masters of information warfare, and they would never allow the West to employ selective memory when it comes to Nazi crimes. When it comes to communist crimes, however, we are encouraged to forget. We are not allowed to conclude that communism was and is as evil as Nazism.

William Gill, in recounting the history of communist subversion in the United States, marveled that congressional investigations into communist subversion were depicted in the American press as an assault on civil liberties. “It was the McCarthy era … that forever removed subversion from the list of palatable political issues in America,” wrote Gill. [iii] Even under President Reagan, there were no significant investigations of communist subversion. “The left,” wrote Gill, “reacted against McCarthyism with an outburst of emotionalism unprecedented in this country.” Willi Schlamm had remarked that anti-McCarthyism had swept reason from the minds of the best-intentioned Americans. “After McCarthy,” added Gill, “anti-communism was dead … as the subject for any meaningful intellectual exploration.”[iv]

The people who had read the anticommunist classics of the 1950s and 60s had not understood what Whittaker Chambers and Louis Budenz and Benjamin Gitlow had attempted to explain; namely, that communism was advancing from strength to strength. Chambers had even said that communism was destined to win the Cold War. And even now, communism’s victory appears likely. Communism was never understood by conservatives because conservatives rarely read communist books; therefore, conservative reflections on communism were full of misunderstandings. To see past all this it is more useful to say what communism is not than to say precisely what it is. Contrary to what conservatives tend to think, communism was never an economic system based on Marx’s theories. Eric Voegelin came closest to describing communism when he wrote of a spiritual sickness (he used the term pneumopathology) by which he meant a disturbance in the life of the spirit. This sickness signifies a derailment of perception in favor of a “second reality” which is more or less an ideological dream.[v]

Even with this insight, Voegelin failed to see in communism the concentrated form of modernity’s danger. He dismissed Soviet communism as mere Russian imperialism. He did not, in a sense, take seriously his own insight into the specter that had haunted Europe and was then haunting the entire world. It was and is the hypocrisy of communist rulers that throws off the scholar and the pedant. They expect a communist to talk and act like a communist book. But even Karl Marx did not talk or act like one of his books. One must consider the flesh-and-blood reality of communists as human beings. While Voegelin shrewdly saw that Marx was “a swindler,” he failed to integrate his insights on pneumopathology with the practical necessities of political organization, nuclear war preparations, and subversion. All these intensify the pathology, concentrating it and directing it towards the most destructive channels imaginable. If you do not stop it, civilization could easily be leveled by it. But even Voegelin was not keen on stopping it insofar as he legitimized Soviet power by denying it’s communist aspect in favor of its Russian imperialist façade. The communist steals from the past because he is a thief and stealing is what he does. But his expropriation does not make him a tsarist or a Russian nationalist. Putin was a career KGB officer, and the KGB was the sword and shield of the Communist Party.

Communism strives to control the destiny of mankind according to the mad reflections of a psychopath who craves unlimited power. In practice, communism exists as a wide array of organizations, visible and invisible – as parties and governments, police agencies and armies, guerilla movements and activist cells, private clubs and false fronts. These do not have to paint themselves red or set up the hammer and sickle flag. They might, as Hitler, strike a nationalist pose; or they might show concern for “the planet” and the environment. Since most people do not want to live under communism, a good disguise is best. The game might then appear to be about feminism or critical race theory. But underneath, it is still communism because it characteristically blames capitalism and its “superstructure” for all that is wrong with the world. All these subsidiary causes are one with the communist cause, because everything from feminism to critical race theory aims at the destruction of family, culture, religion, law, etc. When destroying capitalism, one must pull down the superstructure of capitalism.  He who would destroy capitalism, therefore, must pull down “the patriarchy” and every positive value or moral good. In brief, communism is a special case of nihilism that objectively produces death and destruction as a matter of course. Those who do not see this, do not see communism. Being desensitized by modernity, they cannot properly evaluate the politics of today.

As for communism’s organizational reality: Unlike society as a whole, communism has a special kind of brain. As a world movement it is governed by a hierarchical patchwork of committees or councils which communicate with each other and coordinate their political and military adventures. For many decades the “General Staff” of the communist movement was in Moscow. This was the committee of committees (i.e., the Central Committee of the Communist Party Soviet Union). When that committee went underground with the fall of the Soviet Union, we lost track of the actual center of the movement. In other words, we do not know exactly where it went or how the center was reconstituted. But we can see, from the continued coordination of communists worldwide, that the center still exists. Even if you cannot see the head of a snake, you know that the head is intact if the snake is still moving.

Perhaps the CENTER has been moved to a secret location near the Russian-Chinese border and consists of Russian and Chinese nationals. Perhaps it is, as some have claimed, hiding behind the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation. However that may be, we see the coordination of Russia and China worldwide in support of all communist regimes and communist parties. While Russia and China once pretended to be enemies, we see them working feverishly against America – to bring down the Republic. Even now the economic coordination between Russia and China is being ramped up.  

Presently Russia is at war, reconquering a lost section of the old Soviet Union. We see China mobilizing and preparing. We see Iran testing her missile systems in advance of acquiring nuclear warheads. We see North Korea testing its nuclear missiles. All these bloc countries are moving towards a war footing. They are doing this because some kind of grand offensive is in the offing. Through the good offices of President Biden, who has held America’s southern border open for bloc infiltrators, China appears to be sending men of military age into the United States illegally. Mr. Wang of Lude Media has stated in an interview with me, that Beijing plans to send 250,000 troops into the U.S. by infiltrating them in civilian clothes (as illegal immigrants). Mr. Wang referred to the massing of immigrants along the southern border as Beijing’s “Ho Chi Minh Trail” into America. This reference is suggestive, and we should examine it more closely.

The communist victory in Vietnam and Cambodia, which took place in 1975, was accomplished using tricks that are now being recycled. In 1959, Ho Chi Minh began to infiltrate tens of thousands of communist troops into South Vietnam. These infiltrators formed an army of 100,000 men in the south which came to be called the National Liberation Front (NLF) or Viet Cong. They dug underground nests for themselves in remote jungles or mountains. They stockpiled weapons and blackmailed local villages into supplying food. The leaders of the NLF carried North Vietnamese passports. The NLF/Viet Cong was, in essence, an extension of the North Vietnamese Army. In the early 1960s they started ambushing South Vietnamese troops and police. Before the main infiltration of troops in 1959 there had been an infiltration of assassination teams. In the period 1957-59, the communist assassinated 67 village chiefs. With the entry of regular troops in 1959, the assassinations were extended to schoolteachers, village officials, and health workers who were murdered by the thousands from 1960-1961. And then, after several years, came a grand military offensive to seize control of South Vietnam.

The reason for bringing up the Vietnam War is not to bore you with history. It is to warn the reader that a variant of the Vietnam strategy is being prepared against the United States itself. The open border to the south has made this form of attack possible. We do not know when the infiltrated Chinese forces will begin a campaign of assassinations or attacks on American infrastructure. My advice is that everyone use their imagination as to who the targets of assassination would be and how this would play out politically.  

Of course, someone is bound to discover that Chinese troops are operating inside the United States. Therefore, a general attack on the United States from abroad should also be anticipated – along the lines of the Tet Offensive of 1968; for as we can see, an attack from within is best augmented by a simultaneous attack from abroad.

There is one more thing. President Trump has begun to use the slogan, “Stop Biden’s border bloodbath.” He was referring to illegal aliens crossing the border and committing violent crimes against Americans, which is one of his campaign themes. In response, at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Biden told the assembled reporters that Trump is the enemy of our democracy. Biden said, “The defeated former president has made no secret of his attack on our democracy.” But even more striking, Biden said that Trump had “promised a bloodbath when he loses again. We have to take this seriously.”[vi]

Of course, President Biden intentionally distorted the meaning of Trump’s words, framing Trump as a violent revolutionary intent on overthrowing the Constitution. Why did he say something so untrue, so outlandish, against Trump and his followers? One might ask if this statement was a kind of provocation. Now think, if you can, of the Chinese generals in Beijing. Think of their plan to infiltrate two field armies into the United States, as claimed by Mr. Wang of Lude Media. What are we really looking at here?

Take in the picture as a whole, omitting nothing, if you dare.

Friends and Enemies: the Cold War Parts 1-2

Through the Korean War

Our Vietnam Nightmare

Links and Notes

[i] Marguerite Higgins, Our Vietnam Nightmare (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1965), p. vi.

[ii] John Lewis Gaddis, The Long Peace: Inquiries Into the History of the Cold War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), p. 47.

[iii] William J. Gill, The Ordeal of Otto Otepka (New York: Arlington House, 1970), p. 40.

[iv] Ibid, p. 41.

[v] See Giacomo Maria Arrigo’s essay, “A disturbance in the life of the spirit, or pneumopathology”



Quarterly Contribution (to support the site)

This post was originally published on this site