Dariusz Rozwadowski: The Batory Foundation study simply fits into the basket

Dariusz Rozwadowski: The Batory Foundation study simply fits into the basket

My interviewer is Dariusz Rozwadowski – historian, writer and author of the book “Cultural Marxism. 50 years to fight Western civilization." The subject of the interview is the Batory Foundation study and attempts to negate the existence of neo-marksism.

What is your general reflection after reading the Batory Foundation report?

I'm not amazed at this study at all. Batory Foundation and publication OKO.press. At the end of last year, in November, I was already attacked by this portal, in a much more harsh way, I would say even a very vile way, due to the fact that the article they published accused my individual and respective bishops, including Bishop Ignac Dec and Archbishop Mark Jędraszewski, besides publicist Grzegorz Górny, copying from Nazis, and specified an accusation for all Pole is 1 of the biggest insults. The study duplicates the main thesis that was set in this November 2019 article. Here we are dealing with a classical effort to stigmatize and detest the opponent, who speaks and writes about uncomfortable facts and indicates the threat of a fresh installment of Marxism.

In fact, what the Batory and OKO.press Foundation did perfectly fits into the strategy I wrote in my book “Cultural Marxism. 50 years of fighting Western civilizationIt’s okay. ” all enemy of the revolution, an opponent of Marxism, tries to throw into 1 bag, a bag of labels: a Nazi, a fascist, an anti-semite, a fanatic preaching conspiracy theories, with which there is no sense to discuss. So you can see that the reaction of this average and the study from the Batory Foundation confirm what I wrote in the book, what it has been saying for respective years Krzysztof Karoń, it is besides coincident with the publications on your blog.

Did you invent it? material circumstantial errors or deviations?

There's quite a few mistakes and missteps. The study tries to deny the undeniable facts. The most absurd thing about this material is simply negating the existence of neo-marksism and placing it among conspiracy theories. However, facts are inexorable. The study negates the popularity of Marxist ideology among EU elites, while EU leaders do not hide their fascination with this ideology. They openly mention to it, in an authoritative document, i.e. the 2017 White Paper on the Future of Europe, and mention to Manifest with Ventotene As a signpost of European integration, they celebrate the 200th anniversary of Charles Marx's birth, as the patron of the European Parliament they chose an Italian communist Altier Spinelli. No 1 else is covering up this sympathy, but the study tries to prove that it is not actual that it is simply a conspiracy theory. These facts can be easy checked and faced with them the study cannot withstand.

Instead of a substantive discussion, a factual effort to overthrow besides the Adversaries, we have an endless scope of manipulations and attempts to stigmatize the opponent. The Batory Foundation's study and the publication of OKO.press from the very beginning effort to match their chosen facts or apparent untruths to the previously accepted thesis that "neomarksism is simply a conspiracy explanation of the populist right". The study does not effort to analyse Neo-MarxismIt's a conspiracy theory. In the place of physical analysis, we have an effort to play on the emotions and disgust of the opponent, impputing him with a passion for spreading conspiracy theories, accusing him of fascism, Nazism, or anti-Semitism.

Another manipulation is to effort to prove that the word cultural Marxism is simply a carbon of Nazi “cultural Bolshevikism” which the Nazis utilized in the fight against Bolsheviks before the war to brand russian influence in art. Time limit cultural Marxism was first utilized in 1973 by Trent Schroyer, a lecturer in critical explanation from the American fresh School, which was a Marxist college. So we see that this is simply a word created by Marxists themselves. It was frequently referred to by people associated with the school in Birmingham, the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Research. Cultural Marxism concepts defend, for example, the 3rd generation of Frankfurt School Professor Douglas Kellner. It described the improvement of Marxism as ideology, starting with Marx and Engels and their direct successors (social democracy and pro-Soviet communists), then recalling the names of specified theorists as György Lukács, Antonio Gramsci and Ernst Bloch, in order to yet be able to scratch the title line "cultural". Well, Kellner leaves Frankfurt School, whose legacy was later continued by the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, or mentioned Birmingham School. The described "cultural Marxism" Kellner identifies precisely with "cultural studies", or cultural studies initiated by the British Marxist centre.

Meanwhile, the author of the study and publications of Oko.press is trying to prove that cultural Marxism is the same as it was cultural Bolshevikism. Carcolomous thesis, which is missing the truth, but is simply expected to make specified a belief that those speaking about cultural Marxism duplicate the Nazi's slogans. In general, following the line of thought presented by the author of the report, we enter the heights of absurdity, due to the fact that if she thinks that those who criticize neo-marksism, copy from the Nazis, those who criticize the Nazis, should be called copyists from communists? This is absurd. The Nazis and the communists fought each other, and very frequently both utilized correct arguments, but that does not mean that now those who criticize communism should be called Nazis, and those who criticize Nazism should be called communists. Unfortunately, presenting specified a way of reasoning fits into specified a common belief of the modern left, that communism was better than Nazism. No, both. totalitarianism are evil in pure form.

You've been mentioned as 1 of the main theorists dealing with neo-marksism in Poland. Do you read this as a kind of nobility?

Surely the specified fact that I was mentioned among theorists talking about the danger of neo-marksism can be considered a form of nobility. In this case, we should note the context and intention of the publications we are talking about. Of course, it's about mud. To propose that I preach any conspiracy theories, copy from Nazis and another criminals, is the most usual slander, and this cannot be considered a nobility. Besides, everyone can learn my attitude toward totalitarian systems, Nazism and communism, just scope for my second book entitled “The Heroes of the Detestable” in which I describe the suffering of German Nazism and russian communism to the Polish nation. besides in the book “Cultural Marxism 50 Years Against Western Civilization”, I mark Nazism and point to its crime. Anyone who tries to propose that in my publications I imitate the propaganda of the Nazis, he usually laughs, telling specified nonsense.

What do you think he was? The intent of this report?

As I have already said, reading this report, I felt that it was only an effort to ridicule, brandy, detestation and ridicule all who pointed to the dangers of neo-marksism. The author threw herself from Trump, through Breivik, the Nazis, after Dugin, as if she could not decide who to usage to demonize the opponents of neo-marksism. So she utilized all of the above. How'd that work out? Let me put it this way, after confronting the facts, The study just fits the basket.

Are you expecting further attacks from various leftist environments?

Yes, I anticipate specified attacks. They will be a perfect confirmation of what I'm writing. The subject of neo-Marxism's threat began to penetrate more and more to public opinion. He can no longer be silenced, as utilized to be, Therefore, we must now anticipate attacks and attempts to detest all who indicates a threat.

Finally, delight briefly Tell about your book and subsequent publishing plans.

The book “Cultural Marxism 50 Years Against Western Civilization” tells about the cultural revolution, the core of which is Marxist ideology. I draw the communicative of the evolution of Marxism, which over the years has undergone revisions and mutated to increasingly newer forms. My second book is simply a collection of short stories entitled “Bohaters of the Detestable”, in which I show the drama of Polish heroes against the background of the tragic past of the 20th century. And now I'm working on a book that will talk about the penetration of Marxism into the Catholic Church and the destructive power of this ideology in relation to religion, especially Catholicism.

Thank you so much for talking to me.

Thank you and greet all readers.

LINK: Answer to allegations of OKO.press and Batory Foundation
LINK: The list of errors, shortcomings and substantive shortcomings in the Batory Foundation study was presented in a separate entry in a more transparent form.
LINK: An article on the OKO.press portal
LINK: Batory Foundation Report