FREUD, MARX, AND DARWIN:

The Devil's Dangerous Deceivers

 

 

So much of the moral mess proposed and promoted by the three men above is still widely scattered around us in the 21st century and still permeating the halls of debate and "revolutionary ideas" in assorted academic, media, medical, and political circles. Unfortunately, the same old lies are still being peddled by the same old annoying organ grinders.

 

These men named and shamed above have, in my opinion, caused many of the world's problems that we are all witnessing today on the nightly news broadcasts and were very much aware of exactly what they were creating and trying to achieve during their lifetimes. Their lasting damage still lingers on, unfortunately, rather like a rotting mackerel fish.

 

In considering many of the previous 20th-century (most have now been forgotten, thank goodness), we need to seriously examine the works of Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud, and of course Karl Marx because their lasting "contribution" – if that's how you describe the last two centuries – has survived and flourished and unfortunately spilled over into this new century.

 

Ever since Nero's initial assault on the burgeoning fragile faith, Christianity has always been under a spiritual siege on many battlefields. Many of the attacks on its survival still continue to this present day in places like North Korea and the Middle East, to name just two. There are also many attacks that feature in European academic circles, where words are used instead of bullets. Sadly, today much of these odours will lead to the historical doors of the three men mentioned above.

 

Born in 1856, Sigmund Freud was from a Jewish lineage and from a large family; his nickname was "Sigi." It appears that he was his mother's favourite child and obviously a spoilt boy, much to the chagrin of his sisters, it seems. Plenty of sibling rivalry there!

 

Four years later in 1860, the family upped and located to the atmospheric city of Vienna. Incidentally, this city of waltzes, polkas and apple strudel seems to have been visited from time to time by future dangerous revolutionaries and reprobates, such as Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky. Trotsky himself seems to have had a deep interest in psychology and how it all 'came together.' I do wonder if Trotsky and Freud ever conversed over a cup of latte and a Danish pastry because it seems the dour Dr. Freud frequently visited the then fashionable coffee shops that abound in that city.

 

Also drifting into this pre-war scenario was a struggling young artist named Adolph Hitler, who could also have been spotted peddling postcards of the city’s famous landmarks to tourists, if and when he wasn't looking hungrily through the steamed-up cafe windows. Incidentally, none of these men had ever done a hard days' work in their life, except perhaps Joseph Broz (better known as Marshall Tito), who did seek and find employment as a tool maker in the Mercedes-Benz car factory. I’m not sure about Marx and his assorted travels but, of course, wasn't he always being pursued across Europe by assorted secret police? So, he may well have laid low in a Vienna bolt-hole.

 

As regards Darwin I can find no evidence of a visit to Vienna, yet many of the so-called upper class did make the obligatory European trips, courtesy of the travel agent Thomas Cook. And I'm sure a supposed trip, if it had occurred, would have appealed to him. Interestingly enough, the Austrian Government recently produced a postage stamp commemorating the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth. They also have on display an amusing statue of him perched on a tortoise shell, of all things, in the natural history museum. Reminiscent of Galapagos perhaps?

 

Interestingly, when Marx published Das Kapital, he may or may not have posted a dedicated and signed copy of his book to Darwin for approval in 1873. It appears that Marx admired Darwin's Origin of the Species. Birds of a feather flock together, and these carrion birds of disaster from history bring no good with them in their flight.

 

Marxism ‒ as witnessed in the old world of the outdated atheist Soviet Union pre-1989, of course ‒ has been greatly watered down to a trickle and now eagerly embraces the capitalism of the west, just take a look at Cuba and China, among others.  

 

As for Darwin's reputed "dilemma" over his evolutionary suggestions, which appears to have brought him nothing but problems, especially to his mental and physical health, it is encouraging today to learn that there has been a gradual distancing from his "theories," if that's what you can call them. If prominent European scientists are any barometer, the media reports that they are now claiming that the so-called "theory of evolution" is a lie and that Darwinism is the root cause of the world’s problems, both moral and financial.

 

Attenborough and Dawkins: please take note because if "creationism has arrived in Europe" it is encouraging, although it does seem rather late in coming.

 

The terrible 'twins,' as represented in Darwin and Marx with their influence, have subjected millions to poverty, pain and punishment, and the list of grievous complaints goes on.

 

People need faith, not scientific facts. Devotion, not doubt. This shift in the public's perspective of evolution is significant.

 

Recently the Polish Minister for Education stated quite openly that, "Evolution is a lie." And even a recent German newspaper poll stated with enthusiasm, "Evolution? No thanks."

 

God's true light will not be dimmed, but will forever illuminate the way for repentant sinners, "I am the light of the world," declared the Saviour.

 

As regards Dr. Freud or "Fraud," the evidence of his therapy with its demise and denial for the patient in his hands is more difficult to understand and confirm. Patients certainly placed their trust and life into his nicotine-stained hands, and at a fat perpetual fee, of course.

 

His bizarre personal excavations of the human mind remain absurd to me, as it attributed all human emotion and failures to the bizarre suggestion of sexual exploitation and libido. He offers us the id, the ego, and super ego for valuation. All useless. 

 

Paul the apostle however would remind us how "he died daily."

 

Freud seems to be incarcerated in the folds of his own mind, feeding his own self-importance to his reclining patients. However, Paul by his Christian humility inspires us through his epistles to reach out to God and to seek His love and mercy, something we so desperately need in this fallen world.

 

It was apparently stated by Freud that, "A child would destroy the world if it had the power." But a child is innocent until corrupted by the fallen world of Satan (even though all children are born in original sin). So what children are we talking about here? Or is this just "shrink" double talk to be uttered at jolly seminars or other psychiatric clambakes to be hosted in the Vienna woods?

 

I'm also aware that in his early days in Vienna (a delightful city) he was a cocaine addict and perhaps sampled other harmful substances, and all the time treating his patients. Indeed, were they even aware of this significant flaw in his character? I doubt it.

 

The human psyche of course is not designed for self denial. It always demands more from the same old committed sins. That's why diets fail and alcohol rehab clinics flourish along with personal fitness gymnasiums, and why drug substance outreaches are always fully booked. Many people today protest that it “isn't my fault” when they cause something to go wrong. Many don’t find self-denial always virtuous, it seems.

 

The human mind is never free from doubt or committed serial sins. Because the primordial terrain never sleeps, sin is ever present and prepared to awaken and influence a person to go forth into the release of pleasure, however crass or carnal it might be. Conversely, God's eternal light will burn forever, until the end of time.

 

If Freud is the doctor of the deep recesses of the mind, then his colleague and friend Dr. Fleiss should himself have been committed or served a lengthy prison sentence, because Fleiss nearly dragged Freud down to an early disaster. It seems these frock-coated gents from Vienna believed assorted sexual ailments (mainly in young women) could be caused by "nasal reflex neurosis."

 

A number of women had parts of their noses cauterised and removed, and one patient was left with the disfigurement of having part of the face caved in. Can you believe it? Also patients who reported rapes were informed by the doctors that these were "seductions" to be dismissed as "common fantasies.”

 

As for the face mutilation, Freud and Fleiss seemed to have escaped legal prosecution by being protected by their peers in the medical establishment. More importantly writes Martin Fido, "Generations of children [were] being falsely accused of harbouring dirty minded fantasies...leading many to neurotic adult lives."

 

This is shocking and shameful because into this darkness of confusion promoted by the two doctors, thousands of patients since then have been denied justice, and have not seen their perpetrators sentenced to lengthy prison sentences then or now. They were often told quite forcefully or as punishment that it was all in their minds and, of course, none of it was ever acknowledged as in the doctor's realm of professional mistakes or misconduct.

 

As regards the so-called "scientific" research Freud was so proud of, in which he personally researched the sexual behaviour of children, it remains flawed and intrusive even today. Much of it is speculation, I suggest, on his part and becomes nothing more than a voyeur's delight, bordering on sexual abuse of children. The results are vague, dangerous, and delusional.

 

I am suspicious of and sickened by his methods and how they may have encroached on the unsuspecting innocence of many children themselves, as later written up by him or his researchers for publication by Freud himself. (We should also mention the controversial results funded by the Rockefeller Center that were obtained by Dr. Alfred Kinsey and later published in his famous 1950s reports. It also seems very suspicious to me how he was able to present to the eager public with written field data from dozens of interviews of children ‒ and many others ‒ concerning their emotional/immature feelings revealed to him, in confidence and to his cohorts. Indeed, was some of it filmed by the "good" doctor or his compliant staff? And is such material still locked away in his institute?)

 

Much of it seems to be sheer perversion or child molestation today, and completely immoral and barely within the bounds of the law. Much of the space in the lowest pits of Hell will be reserved for these men and women and their wicked sexual perversions.

 

Freud seems to have detested music (I'm not sure why) except for the grand opera, and he was very superstitious about certain aspects of the occult, including the significance of many numbers, and shared "a half-hearted belief in telepathy," flirting also with medical masonry lodges periodically.

 

He appears to have been frequently attached to his upper-middle class patients' reputations, mainly women of leisure it seems. Later, he would spitefully refer to them in a letter, "I have found little that is good about human beings on the whole. In my experience, most of them are trash." No bedside manner here it seems!

 

One wonders if this is how catholic priests feel about their 'patients,' I mean 'parishioners,' who confide in them, and confess all their little grubby and secret sins, while in the confession box. Freud's patients would lie down; the priests' would kneel.

 

One recent author would call him, "An eccentric and as it turned out a remarkable dreamer." I'm also aware that he gave us those oft-quoted terms, "A Freudian slip," "ego," and "control freak," even perhaps "death wish." He also spoke with frequent admiration of "the great Darwin." One of Freud's many heroes, it seems. Not so the apostle Paul, who defined so much of the New Testament through his encouraging letters to the fledgling churches.

 

Mention must be made of the strain of cancer that invaded Freud's face over many years. This, no doubt, must have been God's judgment on his disbelief and his hostile rejection of his heritage. The pain and inconvenience he experienced when in or out of specialist hospitals for a variety of treatments didn't seem to work for him. Of course none of us will experience the pain and suffering that Christ suffered for us as sinners on the cross.

 

Marx, on the other hand, seems to have distanced himself from the working class socially (except, I suggest, in the popular pub culture then rife in London.) Yet he happily championed them and their causes in his political pamphlets, never emulating them, of course, by getting his own hands dirty in the world of manual work. At about this time, Engel wrote of Marx, "The monster possessed by 10,000 devils." A strange and rather 'revealing' choice of words, and it should be remembered that communism is on a par in rhyming with Illuminism.

 

Instead, he gratuitously sponged off Fredrick Engels' millions. Engel was also a practicing freemason, content to exploit the working class himself both financially and physically while little ones from 10 years old upwards (boys and girls) slaved, lived, and died in appalling conditions in his despicable Manchester factories.

 

According to Freud's confused countenance, religion was a duplicitous illusion that the penitent somehow suffered under. Yet, interestingly, the daughters of both Freud and Marx offered their own lives 'religiously,' promoting and pursuing their fathers' works by bringing them to the notice of the general public.

 

So much of Freud's professional consultations seem to have been fuelled by copious amounts of cocaine. Marx would enjoy the pleasures of alcohol, and Darwin....well, who knows what his doctor prescribed for his frequent depressions and metabolic issues? Maybe laudanum.

 

Freud's role, of course, is to replace God in patients' minds and through his analysis to set them free from doubt, also while taking the credit and naturally at a hefty fee. But, I suggest, he led them into deeper uncertainty. He even gives scant attention to his own Jewish heritage and controversially suggested towards the end of his life that Moses was, "Originally an Egyptian born of Pharaoh's daughter." He also doubts that Moses lived to 120 years old but was murdered by his own people (the Jews).

 

Freud, it seems, never practiced his own religious rituals. So much confusion abounds regarding this man's life and beliefs. Give me the Holy Bible over his writings any day.

 

Most of our problems regarding health in particular are simply self-inflicted, i.e., alcohol dependency, drug abuse, sexual addictions, gluttony, and all other habits so easy to acquire but so difficult to correct. I suggest that the deepest secrecy of the mind can never be excavated, but is instead trapped in its own DNA. Many of those neurons or cells cannot be prised open by a psychologists' diamond-tipped soldering iron, so to speak. Neither today's world nor even our own minds can be at complete peace until the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, returns in triumph (and not too soon for me.) To me, these men are guilty of furthering these mistakes that haunt so many. We must accept that, "The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." These academics, in their deliberate blindness and obstinate self-admiration, have led many screaming to ever lasting Hell that exists beyond death.

 

It is worth considering the strange masculine bond that existed between these three men and their acolytes (Rudolph Hess and Adolph Hitler are another infamous pair that fall into this category).

 

For instance, Marx and Engels had a peculiar relationship both in political partnership and pleasure. They were lifetime collaborators and companions, of course, who frequently took expensive holidays together, including several surprising trips to Jersey. Most likely, Engels generously footed the bill for these self-indulgent trips by these two "revolutionary" egos as they discussed the plight of the poor over expensive bottles of Krug Rose or Dom Perignon champagne. These men certainly knew how to spoil themselves!

 

Is it any coincidence that Freud (after his wife Martha's apparent insistence for no further marital sex in the family boudoir) confided to Fleiss, by letter, about this personal family misfortune that would restrict his conjugal relations with his wife? He would later explain to Fleiss, perhaps in despair, "My need to be with you increases greatly...” and that he (Freud) needed a dominating passion.

 

So, you may ask, what is this all about? 

 

Some have suggested that it was Fleiss who terminated this deep relationship in 1901 between the two men, particularly because of Freud's "homoerotic desires," whatever that means. This was suggested recently by an author researching the two men's working relationship. Either way, for the rest of Freud’s professional life (for whatever reason) he would allow a portrait of Wilhelm Fleiss to be promptly displayed in his office.

 

Thomas Huxley ‒ who was a freemason (as was Charles Darwin) and who also apparently coined the over-used word "agnosticism” (without knowledge) which trips lightly off so many university intellectuals' tongues today ‒ was apparently "groomed by Darwin." Later, he would be referred to as "Darwin’s bulldog." One can only wonder what type of 'grooming' took place. (I also note how one LGBT humanist association recently celebrated the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth. Do they know something I don't!)

 

It has also long been claimed that over one thousand copies of the Origin of the Species, when first published in 1859, were immediately "snapped" up by an appointed Illuminati agent, perhaps Huxley.

 

Although I can neither confirm nor deny any homosexual liaisons with any of the men in this article, nor what their sexual preferences were, all I can say is that there is no conclusive evidence either way, yet!  

 

The pursuit of pleasure i.e., "sins of the flesh" can be described as one of the most evil sins any person can commit because they frequently include others (many innocent and vulnerable) in committing and colluding in their salacious acts. And we certainly need no psychoanalysis to confirm this fact.

 

In conclusion, Darwin, Freud, and Marx, and their faithful deluded acolytes since then have caused more devastation to man's fragile faith than both world wars ever inflicted, if that is possible, which I suggest it is.

 

These men and their ideas can only survive in a secularised world because this is a fallen world, and these men and their followers are marching towards Hell, and taking millions with them, without them even knowing it.

 

Please remember always that we are born in sin, we struggle and survive in sin, and eventually perish in sin, unless of course, we truly repent and are washed in the precious and divine blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Only then are all stains of sins washed away into the sewer that was our previous life.

 

Marxism cannot reform a fallen world, and Darwin's so-called "missing link" between us and the primates still remains a foolish fallacy. Freud’s hang-up about sexual inhibitions should have been left on his consulting couch rooms in Vienna or in his overflowing cigar ashtray. These three men can offer us nothing more than doubt and despair, and sadly millions have followed them towards Hell and its everlasting fires of punishment.

 

Rousseau's famous quoted declaration, "Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains," could well have been echoed by Karl Marx. Tragically, it still lingers on today in naïve and deluded socialist movements and political manifestos. However it is incorrect because man is born in sin, as witnessed in the Garden of Eden. After the fall of man, only the Holy Spirit can set one free upon the new birth, i.e., being born again from above. But until that occurs, a person remains lost and in bonds to the awful chains of their own lusts. This tragic combination results in a further decline into sin and destruction, resulting in more pain and more guilt.

 

The final word must be given to the Holy Bible and the eternal words of Jesus:

 

"I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).

 

If one sincerely wants to find comfort and hope in this life, I would suggest the above verse would be a great Scripture to read, apply, and mediate on.  

 

These dangerous and probably devil-possessed deceivers from the jaded world of politics, science, and psychiatry of the past will eventually be judged and found wanting in their disgust and disdain of the majesty and glory of God, and quite rightly so. And their defence will be futile and feeble.

 

Today, millions still toil and suffer under the yoke of atheism supported by many wicked regimes in this fallen world that exist in the snake pit of the United Nations. Yet one day, very soon, the Prince of Peace will descend on a cloud of brilliance and beauty and within minutes (Heaven's time of course), these false teachers of hate and humanism and their rotten regimes will finally be swept into the recycling bin of history. Until then, we born-again believers can only pray and remember the final prayer of the Holy Bible, that being unmistakably: "Even so, come Lord Jesus. Maranatha!

 

"It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" (Hebrews 9:27).

 

Reference books

 

The World's Worst Medical Mistakes, Martin Fido

Freud, Anthony Storr

Becoming Freud, Anthony Phillips

 

 

 

GPB

1/12/14

(All Rights Reserved)

30th-November-2017