The last revolution: countercultural chronicles of the decline of Europe

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

In 1913, on the eve of the First World War, the Fed's banking structure emerged, with the help of which the warring parties were financed.

Godfathers from the Fed. Debut

The FRS and the banks associated with it in the aggregate constituted the main node of the world financial capital (not only American, but also German Warburgs, Coons and Lebs participated in its construction, Morgan, one of the leading flagships of the FRS, was a Rothschild man, etc. and etc.).

The First World War was the most important stage in their achievement of internal cohesion as well as external domination.

In just one day of the war, the belligerent countries spent about $ 250 million (over 15 billion for today's money!).

Taking into account that on the eve of the war, the annual national income of England and Germany was estimated at about 11 billion gold dollars, Russia - 7.5 billion, and France - 7.3 billion, it is not difficult to make sure that by the end of the first year of the war all the belligerent countries actually went bankrupt. Whatever the outcome of this war, there were the same winners - representatives of the aforementioned banking pool.

"To make the world safe for democracy" - the official goal of the war, announced by President Wilson, meant, first of all, the destruction of traditional empires that served as natural obstacles to the free flow of capital. This goal was brilliantly achieved during the war.

It was the creators of the FRS who made up the retinue of Wilson's advisers at Versailles, where they became the architects of post-war Europe. In addition, important mondialist structures were created at the same time.

However, the ultimate goal - the formation of a World Government - was not achieved. Britain and France violently opposed these attempts, and the newly formed League of Nations turned out to be a rather pitiful instrument. The attempt to Bolshevize Europe, which was also conducted from Wall Street, also ended in failure.

This is how the "golden twenties" of the Weimar Republic began …

Jerusalem on the Frankish Jordan and the dress rehearsal of the Sexual Revolution

In the same year 1923, when Germany collapsed into the abyss of hyperinflation, the Institut für Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Research) was organized at the University of Frankfurt am Main, later turned into the famous Frankfurt school, which was destined to become one of the main Think Tanks (factories of thought) of the youth revolution of the 60s.

The essence of the revolutionary theory of Gramsci: a person of a new type must appear even before Marxism triumphs, and the seizure of political power must be preceded by the seizure of the "kingdom of culture." Thus, the preparations for the revolution must focus on intellectual expansion in the fields of education and culture.

Sexology is suddenly becoming a fashionable and respectable science. The Berlin Institute for Sexual Research (Institut für Sexualwissenschaft), Dr. Magnus Hirschfield, develops a vigorous activity to popularize all kinds of deviations. As mushrooms begin to grow, "experimental schools" with a Marxist bias and sexual education [1].

Even more shocking was the nocturnal aspect of the sexual revolution. Berlin at this time turns into the capital of debauchery. Mel Gordon, in the book "Panic of the Senses: The Erotic World of Weimar Berlin," alone has 17 types of prostitutes. Among them, child prostitution was especially popular.

Children could be ordered by phone or at the pharmacy. Thomas Mann's son, Klaus, characterized this time in his memoirs: “My world, this world has never seen anything like it. We are used to having a first-class army. Now we have first-class perverts."

Stefan Zweig describes the realities of Weimar Berlin in the following way: “All over Kurfürstendamm, ruddy men stroll leisurely and not all of them are professionals; every student wants to make money. (…) Even Rome Suetonius did not know such orgies as the ball of perverts in Berlin, where hundreds of men dressed as women danced under the favorable gaze of the police.

There was some kind of madness in the collapse of all values. Young girls boasted of their promiscuity; to reach sixteen years old and be under suspicion of virginity was shameful …"

In 1932, Herbert Marcuse joined the Frankfurt School, who was destined to become the main spiritual guru of the "new left" revolution of the 60s (it was he who owns its main slogan "Make love, not war!").

According to the exact thought of R. Raymond, “the theory of criticism was essentially a destructive criticism of the main elements of Western culture, including Christianity, capitalism, power, family, patriarchal order, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restrictions, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, inheritance, ethnocentrism, customs and conservatism "[2]

In 1933, members of the Frankfurt School, Wilhelm Reich and other advocates of sex education had to flee Germany. Having settled in the United States, at the turn of the 40-50s. they developed those concepts of cultural-marxism, multiculturalism and political correctness, which will become the ideological basis of the "youth revolution" of the 60s, and then the mainstream of neoliberalism.

A contemporary Anglo-American author, writing under the pseudonym Lasha Darkmun, remarks: “What did the cultural Marxists take from Weimar Germany? They realized that the success of the sexual revolution requires slowness, gradualness.

"Modern forms of submission", teaches the Frankfurt School, "characterizes gentleness." Weimar could not resist because the advance was too stormy. (…) Anyone who wants to boil frogs alive must bring them to a comatose stupor, place them in cold water and cook them to death as slowly as possible.

The young Freud himself, apparently, dreamed of the role of the new Hannibal, designed to crush Rome. This "Hannibal fantasy" was one of the "driving forces" of my "mental life," he declares. Many authors writing about Freud have noted his hatred of Rome, the Catholic Church and Western civilization in general [3].

The work "Totem and Taboo" became for Freud nothing more than an attempt at psychoanalysis of Christian culture. At the same time, according to researchers Rothman and Eisenberg, Freud deliberately tried to hide his subversive motivation: the central aspect of Freud's theory of dreams is that rebellion against strong power should often be carried out with the help of deception, using an "innocent mask" [4]. The sympathies of Freudianism with Trotskyism are also obvious. Trotsky himself favored psychoanalysis [5].

To get rid of the European tradition, Freud "laid on the couch" Christian culture and deconstructed it step by step. It is remarkable that the psychoanalytic school itself, having all the signs of a totalitarian sect, slightly camouflaged as science, did not particularly hide its political goals.

In fact, all of Freudianism from beginning to end was an example of ideological fraud: how else can you call an attempt to reduce the entire variety of manifestations of human love to the sexual instinct, and all political, social world problems - to pure psychology?

To declare, for example, such phenomena as nationalism, fascism, anti-Semitism and traditional religiosity - a neurosis, what have Freudians not tired of doing for over a hundred years?

This clearly reveals the direction of the further campaign of Freud's successors (such as Norman O. Brown, Wilhelm Reich, Herbert Marcuse), the essence of the writings of which boiled down to the statement that "if society can get rid of sexual restrictions, then human relations will be based on love and affection." …

In this thesis, essentially the entire philosophy of the countercultural revolution is collapsed, the entire "hippie movement" that opens the door to sexual freedom, multiculturalism and, ultimately, the "dictatorship of political correctness." All the pseudoscientific chatter of Reich and Marcuse and their psychoanalytic statements turned out to be speculation aimed at fomenting a war against white civilization and culture.

Propaganda as art

The modern American propaganda machine, as we know it, was born in the crucible of the First World War. The most important names here are Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays. Walter Lippmann is a curious person. We know him as one of the creators of the terms "public opinion" (book of the same name in 1922) and "Cold War" (book of the same name in 1947). In America, he bears the honorary title of "father of modern journalism."

After graduating from Harvard, Lippmann took up political journalism, and already in 1916, was welcomed by banker Bernard Baruch and "Colonel" House, Wilson's closest advisers, to the headquarters of the president's team. Such a fast-paced career can be easily explained: Lippmann was the creator of the JP Morgan Chase banking house, which played a huge role in American politics.

In the presidential administration, Lippmann is entrusted with an important task: an urgent need to change the mood of American society from traditional isolationism to the direction of accepting war.

It was Lippmann who recruited Edward Bernays, the nephew and literary agent Sigmund Freud and the inventor of PR [6], to this work, and in a few months his friends succeed in the almost impossible: with the help of sophisticated propaganda and colorful depictions of the fictitious atrocities of the German army in Belgium, push the public opinion of America “into the abyss of mass military hysteria "…

Neoliberalism became the central ideology of Mondialism. (By mondialism we mean the idea of uniting the world under the rule of a single world government. Neoliberalism is the economic component of the ideology of mondialism). For the first time, the term neoliberalism sounded at a meeting of liberal intellectuals organized in Paris in August 1938, and which brought together European economists who are hostile to all forms of state interference in economic life.

The meeting, held under the slogan: to defend liberal freedom from socialism, Stalinism, fascism and other forms of state coercion and collectivism, was called the "Colloquium of Walter Lippmann." The formal subject of the meeting was the discussion of Lippmann's book "The Good Society" (The Good Society, 1937) - a kind of manifesto declaring collectivism to be the beginning of the beginnings of all sin, lack of freedom and totalitarianism.

At the same time, at the end of the First World War, Lippmann, behind the scenes of the Versailles Conference, participates in the creation of the Anglo-American Institute for International Relations, a structure (as well as the Council on Foreign Relations, which was born at the same time, Council on Foreign Relations, CFR), designed to become the center of influence of the financial elite on Anglo-American politics.

These are, in fact, the first axial structures of mondialism and neoliberalism.

By the end of the 20th century, the results of neoliberal reforms around the world are more than impressive. The total wealth of the 358 richest people in the world (only according to official data, which, of course, is far from the present state of affairs) equaled the total income of the poorest part of the world's population (2.3 billion people).

The world financial elite, step by step, approached its main goal - the victory of the ideas of mondialism, the destruction of national states, state borders and the creation of a world government, as one of their ideologues, Zbigniew Brzezinski, directly writes about. Cultural-Marxism serves exactly the same purposes.

For the advancement of the neoliberal revolution, a field is needed, freed from traditional cultures, traditional morality, traditional values.

At this point, we come close to the main semantic core and content of the revolution of the sixties. However, before moving on to its direct events and participants, we must take a look at another cradle of the revolution - the history of American Trotskyism, from which many meanings and heroes of the future (countercultural) revolution emerged.

The right hand of mondialism

As the founder and leader of his own Socialist Workers Party, Max Shachtman stood at the origins of the 4th (Trotskyist) International. By the end of the 30s, among Shachtman's students, we already see such important figures in the neocon world as Irving Kristol, a member of the 4th International in 1940, and Jeane Jordan Kirkpatrick, also a member of Shachtman's Socialist Labor Party. in the future - Advisor on International Politics in the Reagan Cabinet.

At the turn of 1939-40. in the midst of radical Trotskyism, an unexpected turn takes place: Shachtman, together with another notable Trotskyist intellectual, New York University professor James Burnham (who grew up in an Irish Catholic family, but "seduced" into Trotskyism), declares the impossibility of further supporting the USSR, leaves the 4th International and the SWP, taking with them about 40% of its members, and having founded a new left party, announces the need to look for a "third way" in the left movement.

James Burnham declares that now that the USSR is pursuing an imperialist policy (the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the USSR's invasion of Poland and Finland), it is necessary to deny him any support.

And the dreamy eyes of Shachtman and Co. turn to the United States as the greatest state on the planet, the only one capable of protecting Jews from Stalin and Hitler. Thus begins a new path of degenerating Trotskyism. By 1950, Shachtman finally rejected revolutionary socialism and stopped calling himself a Trotskyist. The former Trotskyist who is embarking on the path of righteousness is welcomed by the CIA and the influential forces of the American establishment.

Shachtman enters into closer contact with left-wing intellectuals, Dwight MacDonald and the Partisan Review group, becoming a sort of rallying point for New York Intellectuals. Together with Shachtman, Partisan Review also evolves, becoming more and more anti-Stalinist and anti-fascist. In the 1940s. the magazine begins to popularize Freudianism and the philosophers of the Frankfurt School, and thus turns into a preparatory organ for the future counter-cultural revolution [7].

In the 1960s, Shachtman moved closer to the Democratic Party. And in 1972, shortly before his death, already as an open anti-communist and a supporter of the Vietnam War, he supported Senator Henry “Scoopy” Jackson, a hawk-democrat, a great friend of Israel and an enemy of the USSR. Senator Jackson becomes the gateway to big politics for future neocons.

Douglas Faith, Abram Shulski, Richard Pearl and Paul Wolfowitz start out as assistants to Senator Jackson (all of them will occupy key positions in the Bush administration). Jackson will become the teacher of future neocons in big politics. Jackson's credo: one must not negotiate with the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union must be destroyed - henceforth will become the main credo of future neocons.

So, as Leon Trotsky once sailed from America with open credit from Jacob Schiff to make a revolution in Russia, so now his former followers were preparing to make a revolution in the United States itself, and torpedo the failed experiment in the East.

The former Trotskyists, who had changed their ideological attitudes so drastically, obviously needed a new philosophical justification for their struggle. They needed a spiritual teacher to replace Marx and Trotsky.

And they soon found such a teacher in the person of the esoteric philosopher Leo Strauss (Leo Strauss, 1899-1973). This man still has an ambiguous reputation in various circles as a villainous philosopher and “Jewish Hitler”. And this reputation is connected precisely with the neocons (behind which the nickname leokons, that is, the followers of Leo Strauss), even took root.

Like Shachtman's disciples, Strauss was horrified by European fascism, and especially Hitlerism (in Hitler's "Aryanism" there is no intelligible meaning other than the denial of Jewishness - his word).

And then there was disgust for liberal democracy, the result of which, in essence, was National Socialism. Strauss's conclusion is unambiguous: Western civilization must be protected from itself.

But how? With the moral decay and hedonism that liberalism leads to, Western democratic regimes are doomed. The world can be saved by the “highest truth”, which is contained in nothing else but the knowledge of the nihilistic essence of the world. Proceeding from this paradigm, Strauss, first, comes to a denial of democracy: the masses in no case can be trusted, much less trust them with any "democratic" levers of power.

And secondly, to the denial of liberalism: in no case should the masses be allowed to disintegrate in hedonism or Hamlet's doubts, as the liberal dogma suggests. "The political order can only be stable if it is united by an external threat."

If there is no external threat, it should be fabricated. For how else can a liberal democracy respond to the challenge of totalitarian regimes? Democracies must be ready to answer, and, therefore, the masses must be constantly kept in good shape, frightening them with the image of the enemy and preparing for a big war. It is necessary to return to the ideals of “noble lie”, without a minimum dose of which no society is viable [8].

Strauss does not even limit himself to this and declares that the elite is not bound by any moral obligations to the "silent herd" that it controls. Everything should be allowed to her in relation to the latter.

Its only priority should be to retain power and control the masses, whose bridles and reins should be false values and ideals designed to prevent an unwanted course of events. Strauss is also the author of the idea of constructive chaos. “The secret elite comes to power through wars and revolutions.

To maintain and secure its power, it needs constructive (controlled) chaos aimed at suppressing all forms of resistance,”he says. (Later, his disciples, the neocons, coined the term "creative destruction" to justify the bombing of Middle Eastern cities and the destruction of unwanted states).

The philosopher did not seem to say anything that would contradict the traditional Puritan morality that nurtured American society and American statehood.

Strauss's teaching boiled down to the same, in essence, ideas and ideals that John Calvin and his Puritan followers preached (or simply silently implemented): the world is divided into a handful of those chosen by God (the sign of their chosenness is material well-being) and other mass of the rejected …

As the godfather of neoconservatism, Irving Kristall, rightly pointed out, unlike all other varieties of right-wing ideas in the United States, neoconservatism is a “distinctly American” ideology, an ideology with an “American bone”.

Professor Drone, in the words of Strauss himself, formulates their quintessence as follows: “There are several circles of students, and the less dedicated are suitable, but for a different purpose; to our closest students we pass on the subtleties of the teaching outside the text, in the oral tradition, quite almost secretly. […]

We bring up several issues, all the initiates make up a kind of sect, help each other with a career, making it themselves, keep the teacher up to date. […] In a few decades, “ours” are taking power in the most powerful country in the world without a single shot”[9].

The influence of the neocons, as (in fact) neo-Trotskyists, on the American establishment can hardly be overestimated. Even Republican George W. Bush, who seems to be far from leftism, in 2005 calls for a global democratic revolution, in which he is likened to left-wing globalists. It was precisely her necessity that he justified the intervention in Iraq, as well as support for various "color revolutions".

Powder charge in the center of the world

The title of this chapter quotes the statement of Ernst Bloch: "Music is a powder charge in the center of the world." But why exactly did music become the center, the spirit, the heart of the countercultural revolution?

Why did the previous revolutions, wave after wave, blow after blow hitting the traditional Christian world, have a religious (Luther, Calvin), political (Marx, Lenin, Trotsky) meaning, and music became the spiritual core of the last revolution of consciousness? This question could be answered as follows: music is the primordial foundation of culture. Music is akin to architecture.

According to Pushkin, “music is inferior to love alone. But love is also a melody …”All true religion is full of music, it is the life of religion, its living soul.

Finally, music is the most multicultural, international of all arts, requiring neither words, nor meanings, nor images: an ideal potion of strength in the magical art of pandemonium … Religion, philosophy, poetry, even politics are turned to consciousness, to the heart, and therefore are too complex … Music is addressed to the most ancient, deepest beginnings of the world and man, their most molten magmas, where “there is only rhythm”, and where “only rhythm is possible” …

The pop hit instantly flies around the globe, getting stuck in millions of heads, imposing itself on millions of languages. Music has a mild hypnotic effect, inspiring a person with stable emotional states, which, when repeated, easily reappear. And emotional habits eventually become part of the character.

Theodor Adorno was the man whose work paved the way for the countercultural revolution of the 1960s. Therefore, let's take a closer look at this person. Theodor Adorno (Wiesengrund) was born on September 11, 1903 in Frankfurt am Main. At the University of Frankfurt, he studied philosophy, musicology, psychology and sociology.

There he also met Max Horkheimer and Alban Berg, a student of the modernist composer Arnold Schoenberg. Returning to Frankfurt, he became interested in Freudianism and since 1928 has already actively collaborated with Horkheimer and the Institute for Social Research. As a pupil of Schoenberg and an apologist for the "New Vienna School", Adorno was the main theorist of the "New Art" at the Frankfurt School.

Arnold Schoenberg (1874-1951) invented his own system of "12-tone music", rejecting the classical, created by the old church and traditional European school. That is, he discarded the classical seven-step scale, subject to the dominant power, with its traditional (minor and major) octaves, replacing them with an atonal twelve-step "series" in which all sounds were equal and equal.

It was truly an epoch-making revolution!

The traditional musical notation, as we know it, was invented by the Florentine monk Guido d'Arezzo (990-1160), giving each sign of the staff a name associated with the words of the prayer to John the Baptist:

(UT) queant laxis

(RE) sonare fipis

(MI) ra gestorum

(FA) muli tuorum

(SOL) ve polluti

(LA) bii reatum, (Sa) ncte Ioannes

Translated from Latin: "So that your servants can sing your wonderful deeds with their voices, cleanse the sin from our defiled lips, O Saint John."

In the 16th century, the syllable ut was replaced by a more convenient singing do (from the Latin Dominus - Lord).

At the same time, during the first Gnostic revolution of the Renaissance, for the sake of the new fashion, the names of the notes also changed: Do - Dominus (Lord); Re - rerum (matter); Mi - miraculum (miracle); Fa - familias planetarium (family of planets, i.e. solar system); Sol - solis (Sun); La - lactea via (Milky Way); Si - siderae (heaven). But the new names, as we can see, emphasized the harmonious hierarchy of the scale, in which each note was supposed not only to have its place in the scale hierarchy, but also its place of honor in the general hierarchy of the cosmos.

Schoenberg's twelve-tone system, which the maestro called "dodecaphony" (from Greek δώδεκα - twelve and Greek φωνή - sound), denied any hierarchy, euphony and harmony, recognizing only the absolute equality of “series” of “twelve correlated tones”.

Roughly speaking, there were no more octaves, no white or black keys in Schoenberg's grand piano - all sounds were equal. Which, undoubtedly, was very democratic.

Obviously, the communist Adorno liked the Schönberg revolution. However, his thought went much further than the thought of Schoenberg, who did not leave any philosophical interpretation of his system. Twelve-tone music, Adorno convinced his reader, freed from the principle of domination and submission.

Fragments, dissonances - this is the language of an earthly person, exhausted from the depressing meaninglessness of being … pain and horror.

All the same, the previous hierarchies, as not meeting the aspirations of the individual, demanded, according to Adorno, abolition. Music in the vision of our philosopher turned out to be a kind of “social cipher: this is the only area where a person can grasp the present, the present, which can last.

Therefore, it is music that is given to break frozen forms, “destroy the completeness” of social life, “blow up” that “solidified” society, which is only a “cabinet of curiosities imitating life”.

In the USA, Adorno writes with Horkheimer, "Dialectics of Enlightenment" - "the blackest book of critical theory." The entire Western civilization (including the Roman Empire and Christianity) was declared in this book to be clinical pathology and presented as an endless process of suppression of the personality and the loss of individual freedom.

Since it was impossible to publish such an openly anti-Christian book in the then United States, it was published in Amsterdam in 1947, but remained almost unnoticed, however. However, on the wave of the youth revolution of the 60s, it found a second life, actively spreading among the rebellious students, and in 1969 it was finally reissued, becoming the actual program of the student movement and neo-Marxism.

In 1950, The Authoritarian Personality was published, a book that was destined to become a real battering ram in the hands of left-liberal forces in their campaigns to combat "racial discrimination" and other "prejudices" of the American right.

Adorno reduced the entire complexity of political, historical, social issues to pure psychologism: an “authoritarian personality” (ie a fascist) is generated by the traditional upbringing of an authoritarian family, church and state, which suppress its freedom and sexuality.

White peoples were asked to destroy all their cultural, national, family ties and turn into a low-organized rabble, and all sorts of outcasts and minorities (blacks, feminists, renegades, Jews) to take the reins of government: we have in front of us an ideology of hippies or the foundations of an ideology of political correctness that is actually ready for use, as we know it today.

The rebellion of children against their parents, sexual freedom, disregard for social status, a sharply negative attitude towards patriotism, pride in their race, culture, nation, family - everything that will be vividly expressed in the revolution of the 60s will already be clearly stated in “The Authoritarian Personality.

Let us ask further: is there anything stable in Adorno's world, among all his cries of “unenlightened suffering” that make up the main narrative of the endless waterfall of texts? Undoubtedly, this is the fear of "fascism" as the primary source of all permanent hysterics.

After all - and this terrifying conclusion he had to inevitably draw - the entire European cultural tradition, without exception, gives rise to fascism.

So, if it is impossible for a normal person to read Adorno's books due to their utter absurdity, it is not difficult for a normal person to determine their “assemblage point” pulsing with a red warning light: this is fear that engenders hatred of classical European culture: the Catholic Church, the Roman Empire, the Christian state, the traditional family, national organizations that must be deconstructed once and for all so that "this cannot happen again."

Deconstructed including (and perhaps in the first place) and with the help of new avant-garde music. After all, if the National Socialists managed to build an empire, inspired by the dramatic canvases of Wagner, why not build a new wonderful world, guided by the ideas of Schoenberg? [10]

The chaos of "unenlightened" atoms - that is, in essence, all that should have remained from the big bang of classical culture and civilization in a world in which the new aesthetics was triumphant.

However, totally deconstructing Christian culture and classical tradition ("the language of angels"), Adorno sings the music of modernity in the person of his native "new Viennese school" language ".

In other words, abolishing the Christian tradition with its “speculative triad”, Adorno immediately takes the thundering cavalcade of his philosophy to the notions of Kabbalah. However, for our “Jewish sect” (as the famous Jewish traditionalist Gershom Scholem christened the Frankfurt school caustically) this was more the rule than the exception.

In general, our world is strangely arranged. The terrorist who detonated the bomb in the subway is caught by the police, condemned by society and newspapers. A terrorist who is planting a bomb under the entire universe as a whole is shaking hands with the presidents of the states that he was going to demolish, and the scientific communities extol him as an important philosopher and humanist …

So, by the beginning of the 60s, everything was ready for a countercultural explosion: the dig was completed, the explosives were laid, the wires were connected.

The last thing remained: to give birth to an actual philosopher who could spiritually lead the youth revolution (which the Frankfurt School did in the person of Herbert Marcuse - the intellectual banner of the new left) and find something that could unite all new revolutionaries around the world.

That is, that music that could become a real "social cipher" for all children who decided to break with the parental world, blowing up the hardened society, all this "cabinet of curiosities imitating life": new hot music that would become the last bomb planted under this world…

And, of course, such music was not slow to appear …

[1] Brochures, slightly camouflaged as "scientific and educational" ones, are beginning to appear in mass circulation: "Sexual Pathology", "Prostitution", "Aphrodisiacs", "Perverted", and similar "scientific and educational" films are thrown onto the screens of the country. Science platforms and columns of popular publications are filled with doctors of sexology.

[2] Ryan, Raymond. The origins of political correctness // Raymond V. Raehn. The Historical Roots of “Political Correctness”.

[3] See, for example: Gay, P. A. Godless Jew: Freud, Atheism, and the Making of Psychoanalysis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 1987.

[4] Rothman, S., & Isenberg, P. Sigmund Freud and the politics of marginality, 1974.

[5] In 1923 the newspaper Pravda publishes his article "Literature and Revolution", in which he decisively expresses his support. Psychoanalysis was supported by the so-called. "Pedagogical school" (A. Zalkind, S. Molozhavy, P. Blonsky, L. S. Vygotsky, A. Griboyedov), which was supported in every possible way by the authorities of the USSR in the nihilistic 1920s.

[6] America owes the Freudian cult and dissemination of his ideas, first of all, to him. Bernays himself was attracted not so much by psychoanalysis as by the prospects that he opened in the public field: that is, the possibility of controlling the masses by influencing the unconscious and lower instincts, the most powerful of which Bernays considered fear and sexual desire. Bernays decided to use the term PR to replace the word "propaganda" which seemed inconvenient to him.

[7] In the 50s, a group of New York intellectuals already completely controlled not only the cultural life of the business capital of the United States, but also the cultural life of the main American universities, such as Harvard, Columbia University, the University of Chicago and the University of California - Berkeley (home of the hippies) …

As for their mouthpiece, Partisan Review, he not only departs from orthodox communist positions, but also, as part of the creation of a wide front of the struggle against the USSR and the pro-Soviet sympathies of the Western intelligentsia, begins to secretly receive funding from the CIA (you can read about this, for example, in the English Wikipedia). If this magazine formed the consciousness of students of higher educational institutions, then in the middle ones Freudianism reigned.

[8] Strauss, Leo. City and Man, 1964.

[9] Drone EM The question of the need for a revolution at a given moment in time (the work of Leo Strauss) - M, 2004.

[10] The cultural dominance of National Socialism was indeed Wagner's music, which was building the new German Reich. So maybe Adorno is right and classical music really fizzled out? So that there is no other way to save art, except to replace it with the avant-garde? But it is enough to get acquainted, for example, with the work of Anton Bruckner (1824-1896), to see other ways of development of classical music …

Bruckner was unlucky enough to be Hitler's favorite composer after Wagner. Today it is not performed as often as some Mahler. But the majestic symphonies of this "mystic-pantheist, endowed with the linguistic power of Tauler, Eckhart's imagination and the visionary fervor of Grunewald" (as noted by O. Lang) put the vertical man in the center, freely established in Tradition and God, and not a pitiful parody of man - a rebellious and Adorno's personality, languishing with his own fears.