Communism, God and people

Jul 05, 2008 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

In the United States, perhaps only in literary, political and intellectual circles is the New Yorker magazine known. Outside of the US, the New Yorker is not that popular and widely read. But the New Yorker is one of the world’s top class media houses.

Rated as one of the best in investigative and analytical journalism (yes, there is such a concept as analytical journalism as distinct from reporting the news; analytical journalism is mostly found in a particular genre as in the New Yorker and similar magazines especially in the US), the New Yorker makes for superb reading.

It was the New Yorker that broke the scandal at the Abu Ghraib prison by Pulitzer Prize winner, Seymour Hersh.

Recently on the online edition of the magazine, I read an incisive article on Hugo Chavez. Though the facts were fascinating, I was not in the least surprised. President Chavez has dumped the official jet his predecessors have used for twenty-five years.

Chavez now travels around with a white Airbus –A319 that cost US$65M. It can hold 60 persons and is fitted out with luxury furniture that rivals those found in the private planes of the world’s billionaires.

It has a private compartment. The walls are replete with paintings of Latin American heroes.

This is the President that is an avowed Marxist. It is outside the scope of this column to elaborate on the nature of Marxism, suffice it to say it advocated the acceptance of equality among human beings and the complete rejection of the private accumulation of wealth.

Morally, Marxism would denounce the ostentatious display of wealth. Mr. Chavez came to power in a campaign that was marked by a blistering attack on the elitist rule of his predecessors.

He accused them of neglecting the poor. But all of them traveled in a jet that was 25 years old. You would have expected wild spending by these “imperialist stooges”, a label he gave the presidents that went before him in Venezuela.

One would be interested in knowing why Chavez couldn’t spend that US$65 million on the poor and use the same jet as the “imperialist stooges” did.

It is the ancient story of the hypocrisy and moral failure of communism. Guyanese have seen such amazing communist double standards in their own country with the PPP.

Here is a party that had its origin in the communist ideology yet its members have consistently refused to live by communist ethics.

I have known persons in the PNC, WPA, and many small political organizations that never embraced the communist way of life, yet lived far simpler lives devoid of the trappings of wealth than the Freedom House elite that have pledged eternal devotion to communism.

Ideological and moral values are compelling instincts in people. Once a person embraced these values they have to find expression in the character and lifestyle of the person.

A Muslim would find it revolting to sit down at any occasion and have pork. A feminist would be violently furious if told that a woman must be the supporting plank to a man. A Catholic would not accept the abolition of the papacy.

These are the inherent qualities of their belief-system. If as a president you are going to redistribute wealth to the people you govern, then why would you want to travel in a luxury jet paid for by the tax money of the very people that you are supposed to help? In a few weeks’ time, the PPP will be having its congress.

At the last one in 2004, a motion to remove the reference to the PPP being a Marxist-Leninist party was voted down. All the PPP top generals voted for retention. It is almost certain that the title will remain at the forthcoming congress.

What does it mean to be a Marxist-Leninist Party? What is the character of a Marxist-Leninist Party? Is a Marxist-Leninist Party similar to the American Republican Party or that of the outfit of Mr. Berlusconi of Italy? What kind of lifestyle should a Marxist have?

What should be the essence of his/her character?
Some of the most lying, vicious, mean persons I have met in my life have been very religious people.

Did God fail to influence their behaviour? Likewise I think communism has no effect on its adherents’ morality.

It never did. The predecessors of Chavez didn’t think of running for president indefinitely but Chavez, who is supposed to be morally superior to them, wants to.

Religious and communist hypocrites cling to their faith out of sentiments, not out of devotion. It is not that they believe in their doctrine at the quintessential level. They just feel happy to say they are religious or communist. It begins and ends there.